Datasets:

gollark

/

consciousness

like 0

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 41-45 Polanik, J. Is There an I3? 41 Article Inaugural Issue Is There an I3? A Search Focusing Question for Consciousness Exploration and Research Joseph Polanik ABSTRACT A voyage of exploration requires a question to focus the search. Such a question is proposed for consciousness exploration and research. Is there an I3? The author’s notation for subscripting pronouns by reality type is first explained and then used to diagnose the situation in which contemporary consciousness research finds itself and to pose the search-focusing question for Consciousness Exploration and Research as a means for moving on from here. Key Words: consciousness, exploration, question 1. The Search-Focusing Question1 A voyage of exploration and discovery can begin with a simple search-focusing question. Is there a shorter way to China? What’s beyond that ridge? What am I? As a search-focusing question for the next generation of researchers and explorers, I propose: Is There an I3? To make the case for adopting this searchfocusing question, I will first clarify the rationale for subscripting the first person singular pronoun, I. Then I will present the case for revisioning the science of consciousness so that it may genuinely engage the question, is there an I3. awareness’) while not identical to the brain, is just an experience somehow produced by the brain – merely phenomenology. Still others view consciousness (used as a synonym for an immaterial mind, self or soul) as a thing-like entity that is more than just a phenomenon – more than just the experience of awareness.2 It would seem that, while most would agree that consciousness is real in some sense, there is persistent disagreement as to its reality type. What do I mean by ‘reality type’? simply this: if what is is real (in some sense); then, a reality type is a name for the way that some thing (allegedly) is. For convenience, I name three reality types and number them as follows. 1. existential (anything physical – mass/energy and/or spacetime, an existent); 2. phenomenological (experiential); and 3. ontological (anything that is non-physical but not merely phenomenological, a being) 2. Why Subscripted Pronouns? The rationale for subscripting the first person singular pronoun, I, is simply that ‘consciousness’ – the very term that defines this field of inquiry – is a hopelessly ambiguous term. 2.1 Consciousness is What I Am There are those who assume that consciousness (used as a synonym for ‘mind’) is just the brain. Others assume that consciousness (used as a synonym for ‘phenomenal Correspondence: Joseph Polanik, J.D., M.S.W. Email: jPolanik@nc.rr.com Website: http://what-am-i.net ISSN: 2 There is also the use of ‘conscious’ in phrases like ‘conscious experience’ or ‘conscious awareness’ to mean a particular state of awareness, either reflexive awareness (e.g. awareness of seeing ... whatever) or reflexive self-awareness (e.g. awareness of that which is seeing ... whatever). Consciousness could then be defined as an instance of phenomenal awareness in such a state of awareness. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 41-45 Polanik, J. Is There an I3? For each reality type there is a use of ‘consciousness’ that assumes a referent of that reality type; but, while we could subscript ‘consciousness’ to indicate the reality type of its referent (as used by a given speaker); but, that would only tell us how the word is used. It wouldn’t tell us which definition is correct. Translating from the third-person to a firstperson perspective clarifies the problem enough to transform it. Let us define pronouns I1, I2 and I3 to function syntactically as does the typeambiguous ‘I’ of vernacular English while also conveying the user’s self-asserted reality type. Which of these pronouns could plausibly be used to claim that its referent is a consciousness? Could a group of neurons assert, “I1 am an instance of consciousness”? It seems unlikely – even if those neurons were known to be the neural correlates of consciousness. Similarly, I really can’t imagine a quantum microtubular computation having the capacity to use selfreferential pronouns – even if that computation is the NCC. Could some immaterial entity such as a soul assert, “I3 am an instance of consciousness”? It is hard to answer this question. We don’t yet know that there are any such entities; and, we don’t know what their powers would be, if there were any. Could an instance of phenomenal awareness assert, “I2 am an instance of consciousness”? Posed this way, the question answers itself in the affirmative. Indeed, given the use of ‘consciousness’ as that which is consciously aware, the claim “I2 am an instance of consciousness” is performatively selfverifying. A general discussion of performative arguments is beyond the scope of this paper; and, the reader is referred to Bardon (2005) and Hintikka (1968). In any case, the conclusion just reached is (but for the subscripts, of course) identical to that reached by Deikman (1996): “Thus, if we proceed phenomenologically, we find that the ‘I’ is identical to awareness: ‘I’ = awareness”. 42 2.2 The Problem Transformed Given that I2 experience, it is necessarily true that I2 am. Upon further reflection, I2 will claim that I2 am this experiencing I2; but, I2 must admit still not knowing the origin of experiencing as an experiencing I2. From the perspective in which properties are attributed to meta-phenomenal objects3 to explain phenomena, the problem is that I2 know that I2 am without knowing whether I2 am a phenomenon that is generated by: 1. an I1 alone; 2. an I3 alone; or, 3. an I1 and an I3 working together. How do I learn which meta-phenomenal entity or entities are responsible for generating the phenomenon of experiencing as an experiencing I2? Descartes tried to answer that question by purely rational means; but, he quickly lapsed into an intractable circularity beginning with the Third Meditation. He relied on the natural light to validate the deduction that there is a God; but, the veracity of the natural light in turn depended on God. Clearly, we have no alternative but to proceed by scientific means. 3. The Science of Consciousness Given that I2 have elected to proceed scientifically, I2 am faced with a problem: two of the three types of explanations listed in the previous section assume the possibility that there is an I3 involved in the generation of the experiencing I2 – a possibility denied by contemporary neuroscience on a priori grounds. Consequently, I2 will briefly critique the a priori rejection of the possibility of an I3 by the currently dominant physicalist paradigm of research into consciousness. I2 will then present the case for revisioning the science of consciousness so that it may genuinely engage the question, is there an I3. 3 An entity of reality type 1 or reality type 3 is called meta-phenomenal; meaning, that such entities are real independently of an individual’s experience of them. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 41-45 Polanik, J. Is There an I3? 3.1 The Critique of Physicalism It is said that there are two types of problems in consciousness research: the easy problems, the so-called hard problem. The hard problem is explaining how experience happens. Given that there is experiencing as an experiencing I2, identifying the neural correlate of a particular quale of experience is an easy problem. For example, given that there is subjective experience, an experience of an afterimage is easily explained. A retina that is ‘fatigued’ (by staring at the stimulus object) sends inaccurate signals to the brain which then produces (in some unknown way) the color quale that corresponds to the signal rather than to the actual object being perceived. This tells us where it happens but not how it happens that experience is generated. Given the a priori assumption that there is only one type of meta-phenomenal object, physical objects; and, given the perspective alluded to earlier, in which properties are attributed to meta-phenomenal objects in order to explain phenomena; it follows that measurable neural phenomena cause the experienceable phenomena with which they are correlated. This conversion of correlation into causation might not do significant harm to consciousness research provided that we’re only talking about experiences as simple as afterimages. It is extremely difficult to believe the claim that a brain pronounced dead by skilled physicians somehow causes the NearDeath Experiences so frequently reported. It gets worse once one turns the attention to the hard problem. Now the assumption that the neural correlate causes its phenomenal correlate provides illusory creates the a priori assumption that there is no I3 involved in generating experience itself. In any case the claim that a neural event causes a particular experience creates a logical paradox for monistic physicalism. A cause can not be identical to its own effect; otherwise, nothing would ever happen. To put it another way, if a neural event causes an experienceable phenomenon; then, the neural event has a property the experience doesn’t have (being about to cause that experience). Consequently, ISSN: 43 by the Law of Indiscernibility of Identicals, the measurable, neural phenomenon can not be identical to the experienceable phenomenon. Hence, the logical paradox at the heart of physicalism is that one must either suppress awareness of subjective experience; or, one must admit to some form of dualism. Is it enough to admit to recognizing two types of phenomena, measurable and experienceable? No. Even in the relatively simple case of an afterimage it is apparent that there are two sets of properties that physical objects can have. They can have the property of creating only measurable phenomena; or, they can have the property of causing experienceable phenomena (either in addition to or instead of causing measurable phenomena). That’s property dualism. And there is still no explanation for how experience actually happens – only where it happens. Perhaps, it is time to consider the possibility that there is an I3 involved in the generation of experiencing as an experiencing I2. Arguably, our situation is similar to that faced by Bouvard, the French astronomer who postulated the existence of a then unknown planet to explain irregularities in the orbit of Uranus. (O’Connor and Robertson, 1996) The willingness to consider this possibility may invite allegations of substance dualism; so, let us face up to the hard solution to the hard problem of consciousness research: the physicalist account of consciousness can’t possibly be true unless von Neumann is wrong about quantum mechanics. 3.2 von Neumann on QM In 1932, John von Neumann published Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics in which he axomized the mathematical formalism of QM. He took the time to reject one of the ‘features’ of the Copenhagen Interpretation advocated by Bohr, the ad hoc division of physical reality into a quantum world and a classical world. von Neumann showed that this division was unnecessary; one could have “a unified way of looking at the physical world on a quantum mechanical basis” (Foundations. p. 352). It was an all-quantum theory. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 41-45 Polanik, J. Is There an I3? There was, however, a price to be paid for eliminating Bohr’s ad hoc dualism. If the entire body and brain of the experimenter was subject to the Schrodinger equation, something else, something “outside the calculation” was needed to explain the collapse of the wave function. von Neumann postulated that this was the experimenter’s abstraktes ‘Ich’ – the abstract ‘I’. In discussions of the relation between QM and consciousness, the phrase ‘abstract I’ is usually replaced by the word ‘consciousness’. Obviously, we can’t now review the linguistic history of the word ‘consciousness’ and then draw a valid conclusion as to what the math means; so, let us assume that we must try to understand von Neumann before evaluating arguments for or against the von Neumann Interpretation of QM. 44 Nick Herbert (1993 p. 172) is the most direct: “In the von Neumann interpretation of quantum theory ... consciousness is a process lying outside the laws that govern the material world. It is just this immunity from the quantum rules that allows mind to turn possibility into actuality. Because quantum-based minds are inevitably different in substance from the matter they control, theories of such minds are bound to be dualistic.” Henry P Stapp is more circumspect than Herbert. In his Mindful Universe (2007. p81) he writes: “Contemporary physical theory allows, and its orthodox von Neumann form entails, an interactive dualism that is fully in accord with all the laws of physics.” Is the abstract ‘I’ an I1, an I2 or an I3? We can rule out the I1 right away. The point of von Neumann’s analysis of the measurement problem is that something non-physical is required to collapse the wave function from a superposition of all possible values of the property being measured to the single definite value actually observed. Could the abstract ‘I’ be an I2? Well, is the I2 causally effective in interactions with physical realities? I’ve not done a systematic survey; but, it seems to me that physicalists deny that the I2 (e.g. phenomenal awareness and similar constructs) is causally effective in any way. The basis for this conclusion is that the alternative would violate the so-called ‘causal closure’ of the physical; precisely would be required to have a physical effect – collapsing the wave function. Can anyone imagine how the self, Dennett’s narrative center of gravity, could be anything other than epiphenomenal? I can’t. Thus, it seems likely that ‘abstract I’ as intended by von Neumann is an entity of reality type 3, an I3. This conclusion is supported by evidence that physicists who have chosen to commented on the von Neumann Interpretation of QM or who have developed their own versions of the von Neumann Interpretation seem to have come to the same conclusion. ISSN: Stapp also reports on various email-list discussions concerning his theory, including one in which the present author asked whether quantum interactive dualism was a Cartesianstyle (substance) dualism or a Chalmers-style (property) dualism. Stapp declined to link his views to traditional philosophical terminology; leaving that for the reader. Nevertheless, Stapp’s emphasis on the causal efficacy of conscious choices strongly suggests that, for him, consciousness is not an I2 and that his dualism is not property dualism; particularly, since Chalmers (1996. p. 150 et. seq.) himself indicates that property dualism tends toward epiphenomenalism. 3.3 The Evidence for the I3 What is needed now is empirical evidence to support the essential idea within the von Neumann Interpretation of QM: that there is a subjective reduction of the wave packet. Researchers have begun to look for a subjective reduction signal (“SRS”), some signal evident within a subject experience that occurs at a time when quantum theory indicates that a collapse of the wave function should be taking place. At this point, the results have been mixed. Nunn et al. (1994) took EEG readings of subjects who were asked to perform simple tasks. They reasoned that taking an EEG would count as a measurement and would collapse the Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 41-45 Polanik, J. Is There an I3? wave function of a quantum state in the subject’s brain. This, the researchers theorized, to improve the subject’s performance on observation related tasks. Nunn and co-researchers report that subjects made fewer mistakes while the EEG was recording that when it was not, a result which could not be explained by any non-quantum theory known to them. Bierman (2003) compared the Auditory Evoked Potential of subjects who were observing a previously observed and those who were observing a previously unobserved (and, hence, presumably uncollapsed) quantum state. Significant differences were found. However, Bierman and Whitmarsh (2006) reported failing to replicate the earlier results with an improved apparatus. 45 It would seem that, if there is a signal indicating that a subjective reduction has occurred, we don’t yet know how to reliably elicit it. Nevertheless, the results to date indicate that further research is clearly warranted. 5. Conclusion A genuine science of consciousness must investigate the possibility that there is an I3 somehow associated with or a part of the human individual. Such a science is only now being constructed by researchers and explorers. Let’s see what’s out there. References Bardon, Adrian. 2005. Performative Transcendental Arguments. Philosophia 33. http://www.wfu.edu/~bardona/PTA.pdf Bierman, Dick J. 2003. Does Consciousness Collapse the Wave-Packet? Mind and Matter. 1(1):45-57. Bierman, Dick J. and Whitmarsh, Stephen. (2006). Consciousness and Quantum Physics: Empirical Research on the Subjective Reduction of the State Vector. in Jack A. Tuszynski (Ed). The Emerging Physics of Consciousness. p. 27-48 Chalmers, David J. 1996. The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York: Oxford University Press. Deikman, Arthur. 1996, ‘I’ = Awareness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 3(4):350-6. Herbert, Nick. 1993. Elemental Mind: Human Consciousness and the New Physics. New York: Penguin Books. Nunn, C. M. H. et. al. (1994). Collapse of a Quantum Field may Affect Brain Function. Journal of Consciousness Studies. 1(1):127139. Hintikka, Jaakko. 1968. Cogito, Ergo Sum: Inference or Performance? In Willis Doney (Ed). Descartes: A Collection of Critical Essays. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. James, William. 1981/1890. The Principles of Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. O’Connor and Robertson. 1996. Mathematical Discovery of Planets. http://wwwhistory.mcs.stand.ac.uk/HistTopics/Neptune_and_Pluto.htm ISSN: Stapp. H. P. 2007. Mindful Universe: Quantum Mechanics and the Participating Observer. New York: Springer-Verlag. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 898 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part II) Guest Editorial Time for Quantum Consciousness Massimo Pregnolato* ABSTRACT The consciousness is the basis of our reality and our existence, but the mechanism by which the brain generates thoughts and feelings remains unknown. Most of the explanations depict the brain as a computer, with nerve cells (neurons) and their synaptic connections acting as simple switches. However, the calculation alone cannot explain why we have feelings, awareness and "inner life". Indeed, neurophysiological processes and phenomena of the mind are now among the biggest unanswered questions in science. It is time for quantum consciousness. Key Words: quantum consciousness, mechanism, mind, computer, thought, feeling, reality. Introduction In the Hu’s editorial published in 2008 (Hu, 2008a) he refers to a general reflection on the current values of Science and Religion: “The very revolutions have created a deep gulf between Science and Region as reflected by increased hostilities and seemingly irreconcilable differences between Science and Religion. The very same revolutions have also produced dogmas, arrogance and intolerance of alternative views in Science. On the other hand, the enterprises of Religion seem to lack innovations and are unable to cope with or adapt to the new environments”. Now is the time to make real progress in Science and Religion. It is a call to free knowledge, an appeal to the humanity to move towards the “Knowledge Society”. In a subsequent editorial Hu (2010b) extend his reflections to the status of research on consciousness: “…because our state of consciousness is the catalyst for the transformation of humanity at the dawn of 2012 and the missing link on the pass to truth.” He wrote: “…in mainstream sciences the study and even the mentioning of mind or consciousness are till taboo and indeed the physicists’ version of a theory of everything does not include consciousness. However, physicists encountered consciousness more than eighty years ever since quantum mechanics was born (Rosenblum, 2006). Instead of embracing such encounters and exploring the mystery of consciousness, the majority of physicists have been avoiding the consciousness issue like a plague”. *Correspondence: Massimo Pregnolato, Professor, Quantumbiolab, Department of Medicinal Chemistry, University of Pavia (Italy) Via Taramelli 12, 27100 Pavia, Italy. E-mail: maxp@quantumbionet.org or massimo.pregnolato@unipv.it ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 899 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness Fortunately, not all the physicists feel the same way, on the contrary there are radical idea, such as those of Manousakis, which derives the foundations of quantum mechanics from consciousness. (Manousakis, 2006). This approach is not new you consider that Planck (1931) had also concluded: “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness”. Hu also has formulated his theory of consciousness (Hu, 2004). The consciousness is the basis of our reality and our existence, but the mechanism by which the brain generates thoughts and feelings remains unknown. Most of the explanations depicts the brain as a computer, with nerve cells (neurons) and their synaptic connections acting as simple switches. However, the calculation alone cannot explain why we have feelings, awareness and "inner life". There are many quantum theories based on the common premise that "quantum mechanics" can help us to understand the mind (particularly consciousness) that the "classical mechanics" cannot provide (Vannini, 2008; Smith, 2009) by those theories emerge possible formal descriptions of the most basic mental manifestations, namely, the subjective experience of the process of perception (Manousakis, 2009). Neurophysiological processes and phenomena of the mind are now among the biggest unanswered questions in science and Tarlaci, editor of the NeuroQuantology Journal wrote a recent testimony to the importance of quantum physics in the field of cognitive neuroscience (Tarlaci, 2010). A Radical View of Quantum Consciousness Quantum physics and cognitive-behavioral and Eastern philosophies are recognizing that the reality of space-time that we perceive is only a possible processing of our ordinary consciousness. Just think of how it looks different the space-time and therefore the perception of our reality under the influence of drugs able to alter the state of ordinary consciousness. To understand this view of the universe has been introduced a fundamental element long-overlooked: "The Information". The content of information is the basis of this and all other possible universes. An immense information would be compressed to a scale infinitely smaller than the size of subatomic particles, in what is called "non-local quantum field", self-organization of quantum information would be able to generate self-awareness and even space-time itself. The basic unit of this quantum information is called Qubit. According to this theory, consciousness is not a phenomenon exclusive to humans, but belonging to each particle in this universe. More or less complex aggregates of particles would characterized by streams of consciousness (quantum information), different in their nature and on different time scales. This allows to attribute to any organism living or not such as the materials (including the planets, stars and galaxies) a content of consciousness, though very different in nature from each other. For each entity the perception of physical reality will be different as well as communication. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 900 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness According to classical physics, communication is possible, effectively, only among beings who share the same state of consciousness. According to quantum physics, through the phenomenon of entanglement, the communication can occur instantaneously between particles very far from each others in a non-local fashion whereas, according to the classical view, this it should be possible only between living entities at a distance compatible with the times of the signal transmission. Applying this new vision of reality, the anthropocentric concept of man would be demolished and a fundamental concept of Eastern philosophy would be introduced: all is one and anything cannot be isolated from the rest of the universe. Quantum Biology Dr. Stephen Hawking says: “Humans have existed as a species for less than a million years and we are, as far as we know, the only species on Earth that has even the vaguest notion of physics. We only discovered the atom and learned to unleash its power within the last century. Our understanding of quantum mechanics is rudimentary, at best, yet we are on the verge of developing practical quantum computers that promise virtually unlimited computational power”. While many physicists are trying to get a quantum computer capable of operating at low temperature, other researchers have shown that bacteria and algae are capable of performing quantum computations at normal temperatures for the life from billions of years. First came the news that the birds can see magnetic fields, thanks to quantum effects (Kominis, 2008), it now appears that the pigments used to seize the light in photosynthesis, are able to perform quantum computations (Collini, 2010). The evidence comes from a study on how light energy travels through the molecules involved in photosynthesis. The work was released in February with the announcement in Nature journal that these unique molecules in a seaweed can take advantage of quantum processes at room temperature to transfer the energy without loss. Physicists had excluded this possibility because the heat destroys an effect called quantum coherence. The implication is, as Hameroff and Penrose (Hameroff, 1996, 2010) have told from 15 years, that we may have in our neurons some functioning quantum computers inside the so called “Schrödinger Proteins”. Gregory Engel had shown the same principle in 2007 at the University of California, Berkeley, even if at a temperature of -196°C. His team had developed a complex of batterioclorofilla sulphurous green bacteria discovering that the pigment molecules were linked together in a quantum network. His experiment showed that the quantum superposition allows the energy to explore all possible routes and then choosing the most efficient (Engel, 2007). Engel and his group in Chicago have just repeated the experiment at 4°C and found a quantum coherence of about 300 femtoseconds. (Panitchayangkoon, 2010) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 901 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness Quantum Paradigms of Psychopathology A new window into the nature of mental illness may have opened with the recent publication of an on-line symposium entitled "Quantum Paradigms of Psychopathology" (QPP), which appeared in March of this year as a special issue of the NeuroQuantology Journal. QPP’s novel approach seeks a grounding of psychiatric disease in the counter-intuitive but physically foundational phenomena of the quantum micro-world within the brain. The relevance of physics on that small scale to sentient processes in the normal brain has been an ongoing subject of study since the closing decades of the last century. Pioneers like the physicists Hiroomi Umezawa (Ricciardi, 1967) and Kunio Yasue (Jibu, 1995), mathematicians like Roger Penrose and biomedical investigators like Stuart Hameroff (1996), Gordon Globus (2009) and Gustav Bernroider (2005) have plumbed the depths of subatomic structure and its macroscopic amplifications in search of substrates for quantum computation and other capabilities that may match attributes of the human psyche better than models advocated by conventional cognitive neuroscience. One especially powerful set of insights into the quantum brain has been contributed by Giuseppe Vitiello, his influential book, My Double Unveiled (Vitiello, 2001) has helped to weld the disparate disciplines of quantum field theory, thermodynamics, and neurophysiology into a so-called “dissipative quantum theory” of the conscious brain. The crux of his perspective is the hidden, virtual existence of a shadow brain operating in a time-reversed mode to stabilize the quantum coherence of neural memory structures. The March 2010 on-line QPP symposium is the culmination of a related project that began in June 2008. At that time Donald Mender conducted an informal poll of participants in Quantum Mind, a series of conferences exploring the ideas introduced by Hameroff, Yasue, Vitiello, and others. Mender asked whether there exists among researchers any interest in the prospect of applying insights from Quantum Mind to aberrant processes underlying schizophrenia, bipolar illness, and other forms of psychopathology. The answer was a robust “yes”. Nine fertile texts appeared in the resulting symposium. In his lead target article, Globus (2010) propounded a highly original concept of schizophrenia linked to the “tuning” of quantum vibrations suffusing the brain. Woolf and Tuszynski, offered credible links between psychopathology and quantum-computational dysfunction within the skeletal proteins giving shape to brain cells (Woolf, 2010). Pylkkänen related the physical substrates of mental illness to quantum “pilot waves” and analyzes in detail the significance of Bohm's ontology for quantum paradigms of psychopathology. (Pylkkänen, 2010). Mender himself proposed ways of comprehending the neurophysiology of disordered thinking and emotion in terms of quantum analogies to the freezing and melting of ordinary matter employing the language of quantum phase transitions and the quantum epistemology of Von Neumann, Wigner, and Stapp (Mender, 2010a; Stapp, 2004). Five commentators on these four target papers each introduced additional fresh quantum perspectives on the biophysical origins of psychopathology. A further commentary by Mender on this important monograph number of Neuroquantology has been recently published (Mender, 2010b). Plans are under way for expansion of QPP’s act ivies both on line and at live symposia. Pregnolato’s recent assumption of the QPP Chair affords contributors yet another forum for internet-based discourse through his Quantumbionet web site. Face-to-face conferences will likely occur ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 902 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness in years to come either through umbrella networks or as free standing meetings. The next few decades promise progress in this new area of scientific exploration. Schizophrenia Schizophrenia is a severe psychiatric disorder expression of serious harm to the person's mind which is characterized by an alteration of perception and examination of "reality". Hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thought, and various cognitive impairments have been described in this 'disconnection syndrome', but similar principles are likely to apply to depression and ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). All these diseases are associated with impaired co-ordination of neural population activity, which manifests as abnormal EEG (electroencephalogram) and LFP (local field potential) (Jones, 2010). The symptoms of acute schizophrenia are by their nature the aberrations of conscious experience (Pert, 2007). As reported in a recent Ciba Foundation Symposium (Bock, 2007) current theories on the mechanisms that underlie schizophrenic manifestations differ in their relation to four levels of description: the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, cognitive, and the symptoms. However, what emerges is the current lack of a basic theory of shared links between the occurrence of conscious events and neural bases of the brain, the problem formulated by David Chalmers, known as "The hard problem" (Chalmers, 1995). This problem makes difficult if not impossible to think of theories that touch the foundation and the causes of these symptoms. The research of Paola Zizzi and Massimo Pregnolato, wants to demonstrate how the "quantum theory" and the "basic logic" can provide useful insight in this problem and how they could help us get closer to the construction of such theories. Major Depression Among the articles published in the March issue of Neuroquantology the paper of Tonello and Cocchi (2010) open new question among the possible connection between the biological structure of the cells and the quantum consciousness. Gas-chromatography analysis on blood samples of over 200 people including depressed (with clinical psychiatric diagnosis) and healthy allowed to determine the levels of specific fatty acids in the platelets membrane. The data were then processed by an artificial neural network, the Kohonen Self Organizing Map (SOM) yielding a classification of subjects with major depression versus the normal. According to the fatty acids triplet identified by the SOM, there are evidences that the identification on the map, states for saturation or instauration of the platelet membrane and instantly qualify the subject status in “normal” or “depressed”. This research is still ongoing to correlate the biochemical basis of depression and the Quantum Cytoskeleton Nanowire Network (QCNN) as suggested by the Penrose and Hameroff quantum consciousness model, or the membrane viscosity itself as suggested by the Hu’s model. The measurement of gamma synchrony, coupled with quantitative analyses of the platelet fatty acid triplet and supplemented by the SOM, may serve as a new test for determining quantum correlations with aberrations characteristic of psychiatric illness (Cocchi, 2010). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 903 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness Biovitalistic's Renewal of Knowledge On the 24th of September 2010, the President of the Italian Republic awarded Prof. Massimo Pregnolato with "Giorgio Napolitano Medal" which he shared with Prof. Paolo Manzelli for activities in Quantumbionet/Egocreanet and their connections with the international project "Florentine Renaissance for a new Measurement of Humanity" (FRNMH). As Manzelli says: the birth of modern science began with Galileo Galilei and gave impetus to ideas of "mechanics" in nature that have proliferated during the industrial era on the basis of the "quantitative measurements" of science. This mechanistic conception coincides with the idea of the definitive overcoming of "Vitalism-Renaissance". Today Egocreanet/ON-NS&A collaborators summarize that this "mechanical" approach offers a partial and narrow view of "Life Sciences" because induce new scientific and cultural barriers overly influenced by concepts that were useful for the production of industrial machines, now in obvious crisis also for the progressive "entropic destruction" of the ecosystem. Therefore, the "mechanical" concept does not take into account the complexity of "Life Sciences" and also forbid the inescapable aspects of modern Bio-Vital renaissance, who shared and addressed appropriately trans-disciplinary art and science culture, as become indispensable today to focus very important aspects of contemporary life, such as the defence of the quality of foods, biodiversity in nature and more, which together preclude to the development of Knowledge Based Bio-Economy (KBBE European Strategy). On the renewal trans-disciplinary 's art and science, we landed in an innovative formulation of science coined by Alberto Olivero as "Bio-Vitalism" (Pregnolato, 2010). The innovative aspects of social, economic and cultural meeting of the current proposal, that is included in the FRNMH Project, are intended to implement an open discussion on the topic: “Life Science 2010: The Bio-vitalism in Renaissance Science & Art”. As a matter of facts this new meeting tends to explore strategies and opportunities for development of life sciences in the era of Knowledge Based Bio-Economy, associated with the actual implementation of the Green and Blue-Economy-Economy of the sea (Manzelli, 2010). Robert Pope attempts to establish a Social Cradle to promote the FRNMH Project are generating matters of international interest (Pope, 2010). In essence, we realized that it is time to overcome the reductionist logic and expressions of mechanical science that dominated the industrial age that have widened the gap between nature and culture, creating obvious dangers for the survival of life and biodiversity of our planet. This strategic goal and to take forward the development of a cognitive innovation so that new ideas and design to participate can lead to a profound revision of the horizons of creative development, individual social and economic development. The challenge for the regeneration of learning in terms of "Bio-vitalism" can be achieved by structuring a series of forms of participatory learning in the classroom or online, initially aimed to the aggregation of individuals, associations, publishers and entrepreneurs interested in develop new knowledge and to create conceptual models for the science and art of the XXI century. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 904 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness Currently those who want to join the idea proposed by Pregnolato, may proceed through a continuous involvement in network (use of Facebook and other online tools) directed to propose a series of blogs interconnected to build 2.0 e-learning modules based on trans-disciplinary bio-vitalism. These are the reasons to say that it is time for quantum consciousness to take off in the scientific world and beyond. References Bernroider G, Roy S (2005) Quantum entanglement of K ions, multiple channel states and the role of noise in the brain – SPIE. 5841-29, 205–14 Bock GR and Marsh J Eds (2007) Ciba Foundation Symposium 174 - Experimental and Theoretical Studies of Consciousness. Novartis Foundation Symposia Series. Chalmers D (1995) Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies. 2 (3) 200-219 Collini E, Wong CY, Wilk KE, Curmi PMG, Brumer P, Scholes GD (2010) Coherently wired light-harvesting in photosynthetic marine algae at ambient temperature. Nature. 463, 644-647 Cocchi M, Gabrielli F, Tonello L, Pregnolato M (2010) Interactome Hypothesis of Depression. Neuroquantology, 8 (4) In press. Engel GS, Calhoun TR, Read EL, Ahn T, Mančal T, Cheng Y, Blankenship RE, Fleming GR (2007) Evidence for wavelike energy transfer through quantum coherence in photosynthetic systems. Nature. 446, 782-786 Globus G (2009) Halting the descent into panpsychism: A quantum thermofield theoretical Perspective (67-82) In D. Skrbina, ed. Mind that abides: Panpsychism in the new millenium. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Globus G (2010) Toward a quantum psychiatry: hallucination, thought insertion and DSM. NeuroQuantology. 8 (1) 1-12 Hameroff S, Penrose R (1996) Conscious events as orchestrated spacetime selections. J. Conscious Stud. 3, 36-53 Hameroff S (2010) Clarifying the tubulin bit/qubit - Defending the Penrose-Hameroff Orch OR model of quantum computation in microtubules. October 22, Google Campus, http://sitescontent.google.com/google-workshop-on-quantum-biology/ Hu H, Wu M (2004) Spin-mediated consciousness theory: possible roles of neural membrane nuclear spin ensembles and paramagnetic oxygen. Medical Hypotheses. 63, 633–646 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 905 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness Hu H (2008a) We Have a Dream. A Call to All Men and Women of Science and Religion to Rise Up. NeuroQuantology. 6 (1) 75-79 Hu H (2008b) Reflection 2008: The State of Science, Religion and Consciousness. NeuroQuantology. 6 (4) 323-332 Jibu M, Yasue K (1995) Quantum brain dynamics and consciousness, in Advances in Consciousness Research, Vol.3, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam Jones MW (2010) Errant ensembles: dysfunctional neuronal network dynamics in schizophrenia. Biochem Soc Trans. 38 (2), 516-21 Kominis KI (2008) Quantum Zeno Effect Underpinning the Radical-Ion-Pair Mechanism of Avian Magnetoreception" arXiv:0804.2646v1 [q-bio.BM] Manousakis E (2006) Founding Quantum Theory on the Basis of Consciousness. Foundations of Physics. 36 (6) 795-838 Manousakis E (2009) Quantum formalism to describe binocular rivalry. Biosystems. 98, 57-66 Manzelli P (2010) Knowledge Project 2010 in Science and Art. The General Science Journal. http://wbabin.net/science/manzelli75.pdf Mender D (2010a) Post-classical phase transitions and emergence in psychiatry: beyond George Engel's model of psychopathology. NeuroQuantology. 8 (1) 29-36 Mender D (2010b) From Quantum Wetware to Mental Illness: A Section Editor's First Interim Progress Report. NeuroQuantology. 8 (2) 115‐119 Panitchayangkoon G, Hayes D, Fransted KA, Caram JR, Harel E, Wen J, Blankenship RE, Engel GS (2010) Long-lived quantum coherence in photosynthetic complexes at physiological temperature. arXiv:1001.5108v1 [physics.bio-ph] Pert B (2007) Consciousness and co-consciousness, binding problem and schizophrenia. Neuroendocrinology letters. 28 (6) 723-726 Pylkkänen P (2010) Implications of Bohmian quantum ontology for psychopathology. NeuroQuantology. 8 (1) 37-48 Pope R (2010) Renaissance Science, Registered 21st Century Rebirth Document. EzineArticles. http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=Robert_Pope ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 898-906 906 Pregnolato, M. Time for Quantum Consciousness Pregnolato M (2010) Biodiversity in the Human Physical Body. The new frontiers of metagenomics and quorum sensing. International Journal of Anthropology. in press Ricciardi LM, Umezawa H (1967) Brain and physics of many body problems, Biological Cybernetics, Springer, Berlin. 4 (2) 44-48 Rosenblum B, Kuttner F (2006) Quantum Enigma (Oxford University Press) Smith CU (2009) The 'hard problem' and the quantum physicists. Part 2: Modern times. Brain Cogn. 71 (2) 54-63 Stapp H (2004) Mind, matter, and quantum mechanics. Berlin: Springer Verlag Tarlaci S (2010) Why We Need Quantum Physics for Cognitive Neuroscience. NeuroQuantology. 8 (1) 66‐76 Tonello L, Cocchi M (2010) The cell membrane: a bridge from psychiatry to quantum consciousness? NeuroQuantology 8 (1) 54-60 Vannini A (2008) Quantum model of consciousness. Quantum Biosystems. 2,165-184 Vitiello G (2001) My Double Unveiled – The dissipative quantum model of brain. Benjamins Publishing Co., Amsterdam Woolf N, Craddock T, Friesen D, Tuszynski J (2010) Neuropsychiatric illness: a case for impaired neuroplasticity and possible quantum processing derailment in microtubules. NeuroQuantology. 8 (1) 13-28. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com

877 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 877-884 Janew, C., Dynamic Existence Article Dynamic Existence Claus Janew* Abstract Everything is in motion. "Inertness" arises from (approximative) repetition, that is, through rotation or an alternation that delineates a focus of consciousness. This focus of consciousness, in turn, must also move/alternate (the two differ only in continuity). If its alternation seems to go too far - physically, psychically or intellectually - it reaches into the subconscious. In this way, interconnection is established by the alternation of the focus of consciousness. Therefore, in a world in which everything is interconnected, all focuses must reciprocally transition into each other. "Reality" is a common "goal", a focus which all participants can switch into and which is conscious to them as such, as a potential one. Its "degree of reality" is the probability of its fully becoming conscious (or more simply: its current degree of consciousness). Thus, a reality is created when all participants increase its probability or, respectively, their consciousness of it. Keywords: dynamic existence, consciousness, reality, interconnection. What is real? I am an individual. Nothing and nobody else occupies my standpoint. Otherwise, he would be I. Thus, all what I perceive is individual, perspective of an individual, part of me. The computer screen should be a part of me? And when my daughter is sitting beside me: is it a part of her, then? And she herself would be a component of me? Consequently, it must be so. But why is the screen a part of her? Why are they both not just components of me? Why the detour over her? One could renounce this detour. But this would not be consistent: My daughter differs from the screen, and, nevertheless, I perceive both. That is there is mediation between both within my individuality. This mediation can consist first in my shifting attention from one to the other. While this, my individuality permanently changes a bit, because it is an entirety of its components. Then I can sit down to the place of my daughter and experience another perspective and individuality thus again. Is this that to my daughter? No, of course it is only a geometrical point of view. However, again this point of view is mediated with my first one, while I alternate the views mentally or physically, more or less fast. Now there speaks my daughter and means, the monitor display is poor in contrast from obliquely. This reminds me of my perception on her place, and I conclude from it, her statement must deal something with my perception there. And consequently (alternation!) also with my perception on the present place. Because she has spoken, at other times, also of other things with me, I have understood her perception, her approach to life, already to a bigger extent and, therefore, subordinate to her an own individuality - with a screen as a component. * Correspondence: Claus Janew, Independent Philosopher, http://www.free-will.de E-mail: clausjanew@yahoo.de Note: This work was originally completed in 2009 in German. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 878 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 877-884 Janew, C., Dynamic Existence What has happened? I have permanently alternated positions (attention, viewpoint, approach to life), though always found me in just one. Does this work logically at all? Apparently not. Since if I am not any more there, I am evidently here. Can I be, however, only here? Probably also not. Then I would know nothing from there, but only from here, my individual reality. Though this could be enough for me, actually, my individuality itself arises from such standpoint alternations. This fact results from the uniqueness and entirety of the individual (in Latin „the indivisible“). Because it is not divisible without changing the individual, it differs from all others in any regard. Agreement at any place would presuppose the division of the individuals, namely in the not unique overlapping and the unique remainder. Instead of an overlapping, we would have thus an own individual. 1 Hence, a static individual could be not even subdivided, because everything we consider, for example, as a part (or component) of ourselves just thereby is an indivisible perception position: every organ, every cell, every particle, every wave, every thought. It completely differs from the entirety, because it can nowhere agree with the whole. Without alternation between the components, we could not become the individual that we regard as ourselves. We would be without structure, nothing. Therefore, every individual exists only in the alternation of the individuality. There is no Here or There, but only the alternation between all, with a right now priority position. Thus, the standpoint is a phase of the dynamic individual. Everything that exists for the individual exists dynamically.2 Why then do we consider things seldom as so changing? We say they are relatively constant. Although we know that movement is at the heart of everything, that every individuality changes itself. Or we say, the movement is relatively continuous, so at every moment the whole is itself. At all, the whole is complete and the part is a part. Everything properly. All these phenomena arise from the structure of the dynamic, of the alternation. Approximately closed successions of change generate relative constancy. Finely gradated change seems relatively continuous. And different extent of the alternations makes the difference between “part” and whole. Before we can explain this closer, we must accept logically that the dynamic existence reaches to the infinitely small. No entirety is elementary, because without structure it would be infinitesimal, could not have an effect, not even as a needle sting. After all, we measure everything by its effect. Even an energy quantum cannot shirk, because it has a certain „size“; and it can be only measured (perceived) when it reveals an effect structure, on an electron, for example. But a structure means alternation between individuals (see above). In the case of the energy quantum between the states of the electron, what the quantum arises from. To put the effect down to an elementary quantum, therefore, would not be logical. Without structure no effect (and vice versa) whomever one assigns the effect to. Exactly this effect also expresses itself in the energy size of the quantum (and not vice versa). 1 Only in infinitely small points, the individuals can meet. Since these are nothing without individual derivation. 2 As well as the individual himself, because every standpoint also is a dynamic individual that „derives“ from the others etc. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 879 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 877-884 Janew, C., Dynamic Existence Yet, in the end, we find between the varying individuals and in the center of every individual only an infinitesimal point. That is the alternation happens, actually, between single points. Though, of course these are defined by alternation only, so that alternation turns out again as the basic structure. Because this basic structure extends to the infinitesimal, I call it infinitesimality structure. The form of the alternation, therefore, is the form of the infinitesimality structure. If an individual never returned, „exist“ only one infinitesimal moment, nobody could grasp it. If it returned precisely, nobody could perceive its change. Hence, there should be - aside from the change from A to B and B to A’ - also a change from A’ to B’ as well as from B’ to A’’ etc.3, so that an approximate unity of A and B is weaved. In the middle (unity!) between A and B, a quasi-static approximate object of the alternation thereby comes out. Not the previously mentioned tissue, but rather a symbolic form circumscribed by it. This already resembles that what we usually call a thing. 4 If the unity predominates, the object is denser, like the tissue. If the difference predominates, it is thinner, sometimes hardly discernibly, because it is due to a more peripheral fabric. The approximation - whether dense or thin - is also individual of course, with an infinitesimal center of identity, so that an alternation takes place between identity and difference of A and B, between oneness and multitude. In the last consequence between the central point and periphery, and again the center inbetween and its periphery etc. In the course of this, also spiral tissue and approximations are produced between all centers and peripheries: there originates an entire, more or less uniform thing. 5 In the case of the screen the thing is dense: we change from edge to edge, edge to center, pixel to pixel; all individual settings - identity centers - in the awareness of their dynamically existing alternatives. Nevertheless, between my daughter and me the difference predominates; no approximate object crystallizes out, although we feel an ethereal quasi-static unity between us. If I extend the dynamic of my standpoint to the situation as such, now I alternate between relatively independent „parts“ (screen, daughter, I), while I put myself into the position of my daughter, realize a solid monitor etc. I perceive from the respective position an individual totality; and over and over again also from the center of the „whole“ situation, which I arrange individually as well. Does this mean a universal definition of existence on the base of individuality alternations? Yes, because another existence than an individual one is not consistently generalizable. 3 Moreover, also between A’ and A, A’’ and A’ etc. 4 To be precise: For the individual A who becomes aware of its phase B the approximation between them is a potential to the existence of B. If it becomes aware of the alternation between two other phases of itself, the approximation seems concrete. 5 Because the approximation is basically a potential to the reproduction of the in each case other side, she can be no additional individual, but was present from the beginning of the alternation - as an original change partner who went over to an other one and is now the center. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 880 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 877-884 Janew, C., Dynamic Existence The alternation does not happen necessarily physically (whatever is meant by „physically“). It depends only on the position of perception. The need of the infinitesimality structure to grasp this dynamic shows that we can speak as well of consciousness or consciousness foci. Since nothing is solid, everything are back-coupling alternation structures of alternations. These also must not be space-temporal. This is only our habitual perception. Alternation can and will take place in every state space formed by quite different coordinates. How these alternations are arranged by perception, is open, too. Dreams and associations are an example of this. Nevertheless, the logical consequences are bigger: If everything exists only in the alternation of the individuality, this alternation must enclose the whole universe! No alternation can be separated from the others completely, run possibly in parallel, because this would mean an absolute division of the universe. That is we speak of one single alternation. If the universe is unlimited - and for a final limit there is in no direction a reason - then the position change must occur at infinite speed. („Speed“ as its space-temporal interpretation.) This is the basic speed from which every relatively limited consciousness is filtered out by the form of the alternation. Such filtering forms are narrow back couplings, which reduce the superficial frequency of the change, slow down movement apparently, so that the quicker frequencies work only in the little conscious background. Just as well as if I concentrate upon the screen and „forget“ my daughter besides, while I am still aware of her and a lot of farther. Even the macrocosm has not disappeared completely. Only the details are not resolved any more. 6 If the form shows a finely gradated structure, it seems solid. If it proves in addition a drift, we have a continuous movement. If it is closely tied and variously intertwined, it will not dissolve fast. If it more allows spontaneous change, it will develop new, but related structures. What does it mean, actually, to say „we“? Do „we“ see anything? Also this „we“ and „our“ something originate from the exchange of positions - while we transform (!) subjective information back and forth and create thus an approximate collectivity. 7 It needs a paradigm change from the view of “objective” objects to the awareness of a dynamic individual that alternates through all realities and determines itself by the form of this alternation. Despite it is unusual: The infinite basic speed gives every way to it. 8 Even 6 From this the reality funnel originates, as it is described in my e-book „How Consciousness Creates Reality“ (in the chapter of the same name). This is the very abridged version of my German book „Die Erschaffung der Realität“ (The Creation of Reality). They are both available from www.free-will.de. 7 See the chapter „Projection and creating approximations“ in „How Consciousness Creates Reality“ 8 I have thought through all basic questions, which arose to me from this result. Here their discussion would be too extensive. However, I will answer with pleasure your questions by e-mail. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 881 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 877-884 Janew, C., Dynamic Existence with a relatively steady awareness of my individuality, with a self-filtered consciousness, sitting here, I am at every moment a phase of the unlimited alternation. The terms awareness, individual, standpoint, consciousness, focus are basically synonymous. I only structure with them the all-embracing dynamic. If I sit down from one place on the other, I do nothing else, than to relate phases of my unlimited alternation back coupling to each other and thus design a local change. What is creation? The infinitesimality structure of focus dynamic has another two essential consequences: 1. The freedom of choice of consciousness is automatically integrated. I have founded this in my article Omnipresent Consciousness and Free Will as well as in my e-book How Consciousness Creates Reality.9 In brief: Weighing describes a back coupling between alternative changes. This indefiniteness circumscribes an entirety and defines it thus up to an infinitesimal center. However, in a decisive situation the indefiniteness of the progress is also an indefiniteness of the situation as a whole. The alternatives are defined on the other hand as those very well. That is definiteness and indefiniteness of the situation can be separated from the decision-making process at no place, they actually arise from it. Besides, the peripheral structure of the whole and its most internal core establish an infinitesimality-structured unity. This unites definiteness and indefiniteness also totally. In this totality both are assimilated, are not even partly distinguishable. Hence, from this totality every new definiteness is freely chosen. 2. All consciousness is also tied together immediately with each other - not only by immediate focus alternation, but by the central identity in every „braked“, with apparently limited focus speed. I have explained this in the mentioned booklet, too. 10 The approach: Every consciousness is in infinitesimality-structured relation to all others. In this relation, the center of every consciousness is also identified with the center of the totality, because such unity centers are at every place „between“ part and whole. Accordingly, the decisions of partial consciousness and whole consciousness from the unity with these centers are also identical. If we consider in addition the described presence of all individual realities in the awareness of our own, we get a shimmering, adaptable „consciousness net“ from which every consciousness chooses its reality permanently. According to structure of the network one reality is more likely and the other one less. If consciousness makes a probable reality its actual one, the others „fall down a bit“, lose probability. They become potential. 9 See the chapter „Consciousness – the infinitesimality structure”. 10 See the chapters „Consciousness – the infinitesimality structure” and „Our permanent choice”. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 882 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 877-884 Janew, C., Dynamic Existence Because our current awareness is tied together with all other awareness indirectly and immediately, consciously and less consciously to subconsciously, it can come to an agreement with them about a collective approximate reality. The biggest part of the coordination will take place for capacity reasons subconsciously (nevertheless, always within awareness), so that we must make not too big thoughts about the form of the world. Also, its stability will be maintained naturally subconsciously. For this we have recognized the general structure, although we do not know most concrete processes yet. Accordingly, the creation of a collective reality would be the decision of all participant individuals for a priority approximation of their positions and the fading out of others. This can be illustrated by the origin of the screen. From all states to which all individuals are fluctuating permanently, a not too improbable one (the vague „idea“) is „condensed“ in a physical object by the inventor / manufacturer. He raises that advance-felt (or investigated) probability by attention, skill and energy application to 100%. Then it is handed over to us „attention-energetic“, is selected by us in this form from the huge number of offers. Other versions are not considered any more. We fade them out. After that, we further construct from the acquired approximate object a more individual screen, our very own one (as described) from which the manufacturer gets as a rule nothing more. However, our screen remains more narrowly related with the prototype than the prototype with the vague „idea“ selected by the inventor - this „idea“ has hardened on a higher level. The friends who visit us (!) may now easily construct a similar screen on our desk. We maintain the stability of the „material object“ partly consciously, because we appreciate it. We also find the way back repeatedly - consciously and half consciously - to the state of screen consideration (i.e. home). And if the object is broken, in the end, we let recycle the atoms. Only how the consciousness net maintains physical laws and human prejudices is widely unsolved. How much we can consciously create, therefore is left to our experimental joy and personal development. There is no lack of guides to it. According to my experience, our possibilities are clearly bigger than materialists believe, but their probabilities often are not so high as many others promise. „Matter“ is compressed consciousness, however, the „matrix“ wants to be taken along.11 Two subtle questions arise if one considers the timelessness of the alternation between all „past“ and „future“ individuals: 1. If every focus, every individual, every reality is run through permanently, how can we create then a reality? How can it be really new? To put it briefly: The way is more than the goal. Though every individual is a phase of all others, however, its awareness is a unique hierarchy of probabilities, which exists only if it is just taken. Though it is generated at every moment again, the filtered, slower way from peak A to peak B is not! Although it shows a partial frequency of the infinite, there it is only here and now where it is walked. 11 Allusion on the feature film of the same name in which the „matrix“ stands for the collective consciousness network. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 883 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 877-884 Janew, C., Dynamic Existence 2. If everything already exists in the focus movement, is there then a universal development, or is everything merely repeated? This question is related to the preceding one, and so the answer is easy.12 The unique slow way does not recur most probably, because it is infinite. Also, it can be hardly repeated by someone else (or ourselves), because our freedom of choice makes it unpredictable. Somebody who wanted to follow it would not make the same decisions. Another question on the direction of individual development leads us to the concept of value fulfillment, which can be assumed maybe from the above if we include the asymmetry between restriction that is more quasi-static and dynamic infinity. I would like to close here with a self-citation: „Value fulfillment cannot be determined by a goal. It exists rather in its own prospering, it is in itself way and goal, an experienced awareness and timeless. It means feeling the own meaning in the world, also the own significance, and living according to this value feeling. This feeling encloses its own growth, as well as the growing awareness of a more comprehensive whole in which it is secured.“ 13 Additional comment by the author (2010): Individuality and the physical paradigm The physical paradigm contains serious distortions or inconsistencies: 1. The Brain is seen as the ultimate "perceiver". But who perceives the brain? The brain again? This is a circle, where my concept of circumscription comes in. 2. Reality is seen as physical after all, and by "physical" our paradigm is meant. From this a limited view of information derives. Here, my infinitesimality structure suggests a deeper view from which "information" derives. 3. "Physical" also means "objective", and objectivity is considered to be "not part of the observer" (the term "observer" contains this misunderstanding in itself). So where in this world is the observer? Observed by whom? Or not observed at all? Infinitesimality structure means, that there is no object in itself. Objects only condense from universal change by circumscription. This change is an alternation between individuals, and these individuals are condensations of this change, too. So neither firm objects nor objective individuals exist. There is only change or alternation in itself (structure of alternation). 12 Both questions can be refined in several directions, which is why I have dedicated to them an own chapter („Die Unzerstörbarkeit des Individuums”) in my German book „Die Erschaffung der Realität”. 13 „Die Erschaffung der Realität”, Chapter „Werterfüllung“. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 884 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 877-884 Janew, C., Dynamic Existence Quantum physics describes another form of alternation than classical physics. There seems to be a basic unity, an elementary quantum. To perceive (or think) such a quantum, however, needs circumscription of "it", condensation of a movement. Again, there is no quantum in itself, although we treat it as such – and limit our focus on it. How then can it be circumscribed so stable? This is the question to be asked, while not simplifying it to an object in itself (except for practical use). In this concept there is no exclusive observer, there are only individual views (= individuals). Every view is unlimited at the end (and so are the individuals), but is limited asymptotically by self-reflection aimed at a controllable world and at building structures at all. (A continuous plenum reflects on limited structure to define itself.) To view the world infinitesimality-structured means to think beyond elementary quantum and quantum information, because "information" is already a condensation, a permanent attuning of alternating individuals (individual views). No information is transmitted: An attunement takes place – by condensating a change, changing position, and decondensating individually. The whole process is precondensated before of course by developing a "common" language, establishing a "common" infrastructure etc., and by unknown processes, too. Alternation is unlimited, because logically there cannot be a limit without the possibility to cross it in principle. I know that logic is thought by humans, but on the other hand thinking is seen as an appropriate tool to relate to the bigger world. It must be so, otherwise we would not (self-) exist in it. Although our thinking may be inconsistent, it cannot be meaningless to the bigger extent. Although the "ultimate" observer does not exist, individual standpoints do exist; and so does their attunement. Infinitesimality and infinity are consequences of limitlessness with respect to the existent meaning of the individual thinking. They can be well a camouflage for unperceived structures, but they always point beyond the perceived ones and they always remain essential values to deal with. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-4 Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Consciousness Research to New Heights 1 Editorial Inaugural Issue Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Consciousness Research to New Heights Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research ("JCER") is a publication in which scientists, philosophers and other learned scholars publish their research results and express their views on the the nature, origin and mechanism of consciousness. JCER is not about a particular philosophical view of consciousness nor is it focused on philosophical debates which have been done over the millenia. Rather, it is a journal mainly dedicated to the scientific studies of consciousness. JCER is published by QuantumDream, Inc. We are committed to truth and excellence at JCER. Key Words: consciousness, science, exploration, research 1. Purpose, Mission & Policy1 The main purpose and mission of JCER are to conduct scientific studies on the nature, origin and mechanism of consciousness. It is a journal in which scientists, philosophers and other learned scholars publish their research results and express their views on issues outline herein. In doing so, we hope that one day we will be able to arrive at a genuine science of consciousness. The current policy at JCER is editorial invitation for publication and editorial selections of submitted papers for publication. All papers published by JCER are either subject to openpeer-review (“OPR”) in the same issue of JCER or open to OPR in subsequent issues of JCER. 2. The State of Consciousness Research “As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the Corresponding author: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D. Address: QuantumDream, Inc., P.O. Box 267, Stony Brook, NY 11790, USA. E-mail: hupinghu@quantumbrain.org ISSN: matrix of all matter.” These were the words of Max Planck (1944). Planck (1931) had also stated that “I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.” However, in mainstream sciences today the study and even the mentioning of mind or consciousness are till taboo and the physicists’ version of a theory of everything does not include consciousness. Indeed, physicists encountered consciousness more than eighty years ever since quantum mechanics was born (see, e.g., Rosenblum & Kuttner, 2006). Instead of embracing such encounters and exploring the mystery of consciousness, the majority of physicists have been avoiding the consciousness issue like a plague. The irony is that, if we cannot understand ourselves and refuse to do so, how can we hope to understand fundamentally the world surrounding us. Shouldn’t the logic be that in order to understand the external world fundamentally we need also (or we must first) to understand how consciousness work? On the other hand, in the current field of consciousness research some individuals treat the field not as an arena of truth-seeking but a playground for personal gratifications and gains. The goal for them is not about truth but themselves. These individuals create so much of the unhealthy atmosphere in consciousness Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-4 Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Consciousness Research to New Heights research such as rivalry, arrogance, protectionism and intolerance of alternative views which lead to mediocrity and stagnancy in the field. Similarly, being the mouthpieces of the entrenched, dogmatic, and/or self-proclaimed authorities in the field, some of the journals, electronic archives and conferences covering the field reject or degrade many original works, although freedom and impartiality are their slogan. 3. The Way Out of the Crisis So, how can we turn around the currently depressing and even shameful situations? First, all men and women of consciousness research have to rise above ourselves by putting our personal interests and gains aside and the mission of truth-seeking as the first priority. Second. All truth-seeking men and women should be granted the rights of freedom, equality and opportunity to be heard in the pursuit of truth. Third, all men and women of consciousness research should be humble, openminded and tolerant of alternative and opposing views. Over the last 450 years since Copernicus, we have reached the golden age of science. It is up to us, the modern scientists and all truthseeking men and women, to study the nature of consciousness scientifically so as to usher mankind into a new era of unprecedented enlightenment and knowledge. 4. Authors’ View on Consciousness The authors are of the view that the reality is an interactive quantum reality centered on consciousness and the interaction between consciousness and reality seems to be a “chicken-egg” puzzle. The perplexing questions are: (1) Is quantum reality (the “chicken”) produced and influence by consciousness (the “egg”); or (2) is consciousness produced and influenced by quantum reality? Quite a few consciousness researchers have tried to answer parts of these two questions. For example, on the first question, Henry Stapp (1993) has made heroic efforts in the face of various criticisms. On the second question, Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff (1996), for example, have made tremendous efforts in producing and advocating the Penrose-Hameroff ISSN: 2 model. Philosophically, David Chalmers (1996) in the 90’s shook up the field of consciousness research with his classification of the problems of consciousness into “easy problems” and “hard problems”. However, the answers to all these fundamental questions are far from settled and they must be answered to arrive at a genuine science of consciousness. Borrowing from certain philosophy of Hinduism, the herein authors are inclined to believe that: (1) consciousness is both transcendent and immanent, that is, the transcendental aspect of consciousness produces and influences reality as the interactive output of consciousness and, in turn, reality produces and influences immanent aspect of consciousness as the interactive input to consciousness; and (2) Human consciousness is a limited or individualized version of this dualaspect consciousness such that we have limited free will and limited observation/experience which is mostly classical at macroscopic levels but quantum at microscopic levels. As a limited transcendental consciousness, we have through free will the choice of what measurement to do in a quantum experiment but not the ability to control the result of measurement. That is, the result appears to us as random. On the other hand, at the macroscopic level, we also have the choice through free will of what to do but the outcome, depending on context, is sometimes certain and at other times uncertain. Further, as a limited immanent consciousness, we can only observe the measurement result in a quantum experiment which we conduct and experiences the macroscopic environment surrounding us as the classical world. 5. Milestones Leading to the Launch of JCER The herein authors have been conducting scientific studies of consciousness over last ten years since 2000 (See, e.g., Hu & Wu, 2001-2007) thus making the launch of JCER feasible and practical. In a series of publications, the herein authors proposed a novel mechanism of anesthetic action, a spin-mediated consciousness theory, and a theory in which spin is the primordial self-referential process driving Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-4 Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Consciousness Research to New Heights [immanent] consciousness (See, e.g., Hu & Wu, 2001-2004). Then, the authors found ways to test experimentally the spin-mediated consciousness theory and biological (& macroscopic) quantum entanglement (Hu & Wu, 2006-2007). It was discovered that applying magnetic pulses to the brain when an anesthetic was placed in between caused the brain to feel the effect of said anesthetic as if the test subject had actually inhaled the same (Hu & Wu, 2006a&b). Through additional experiments, the authors verified that the said brain effect was indeed the consequence of quantum entanglement (Id.). These results support the possibility of a quantum brain. Experimenting with simple physical systems such as water quantumentangled with water being manipulated, the authors also found non-local chemical, thermal and gravitational effects (Hu & Wu, 2006c, 2007). These non-local effects also support a quantum brain theory such as the spin mediated consciousness theory (Id.). In short, the above experiments call for drastic changes in the authors own under-standings of nature, consciousness and life. On December 21, 2009, the herein authors made public their work entitled “The Principle of Existence: Toward a Scientific Theory of Everything.” The work was also submitted for publication on the same day to a journal which provisionally accepted it for publication pending review of the mathematics. The feedback from the two reviewers as relayed by the chief editor of that journal under submission was that there is too much theology in the work (which is not true as any reader of the preprint of the work can tell) thus unsuitable for publication. To accommodate and/or conform to the current circumstances in science and consciousness research, the herein authors have decided to modify their work by leaving the word GOD, ALLAH and Creator out and publish the modified work in this journal. However, the herein authors strongly feel that this yielding to the present circumstances of scientific journalism hardly do justice to the work or to the scientific GOD which the work proposes. So, the original version has been published separately. In short, time is ripe to launch JCER at this critical moment – the first month and year of a ISSN: 3 brand-new decade in the New Millennium and the fast approaching December 2012 during which the supposed transformation of mankind shall occur. The herein authors believe that the state of consciousness of mankind is the missing link for the supposed transformation to take place. 6. The Contents of the Inaugural Issue Besides the work of the herein authors, this inaugural issue also contains original works of several authors by editorial invitations. The papers appear in reverse alphabetic order by the last name of the first author. The work of Dainis Zeps illustrates cognitum hypothesis and cognitum consciousness through which Zeps offers a route to the unification of mind and matter. Zeps passionately ask the question: “May we imagine that materialistic and idealistic thinkers were both right in all point concerning mind and matter they have quarreled for centuries?” The work of Stephen P. Smith investigates the conflict between formality and intuition and discusses the importance of sentience (or feeling). Among other things, Smith argues that “sentience is covertly connected to space-time geometry when axioms of congruency are stipulated, essentially hiding in the formality what is sense-certain.” The work of Dick Richardson illustrates from the mystical point of view “consciousness, time and prespacetime as consciousness finds it to be.” Richardson argues that “only things in time and space which were not made in time and space can go back beyond time and space where they come from.” The best way to understand Richardson’s work fully is to read his online book given in the reference section of his paper. The work of Joseph Polanik questions whether “there is an I3”, and recommends that this question be the focusing question of JCER. To this end, Polanik describes his notation for subscripting pronouns by reality type and then these are used to diagnose the situation in which contemporary consciousness research finds itself and to pose the search-focusing question for JCER as a means for moving on from here. Then the work of Alan Oliver addresses the “Hard Problem” from the perspective of the ancient teaching in Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 1-4 Hu, H. & Wu, M. Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Consciousness Research to New Heights Oliver finds ontological similarity between the herein authors’ work to appear as the last paper in this issue and the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. The reason for this similarity, according to Oliver, is that “both seemed to progress through the same or similar steps in a journey from prespacetime to the everyday reality in which we and the Hard Problem exist.” Indeed, the graphics in the cover page of this Inaugural Issue tries to capture Oliver’s view. Finally, the work of the herein authors attempts to lay out an ontological and mathematical foundation toward a scientific theory of everything: “In the beginning there was Consciousness by itself e0 =1 materially 4 empty and spiritually restless. And it began to imagine through primordial self-referential spin: 1=e0=eiM-iM=eiMe-iM=e-iM/ e-iM = eiM/ eiM… such that it created the external object to be observed and internal object as observed, separated them into external world and internal world, caused them to interact through selfreferential Matrix Law and thus gave birth to the Universe which it has since passionately loved, sustained and made to evolve.” In closing let us remind ourselves that consciousness study is a sacred enterprise of truth. So, let freedom and knowledge to ring and let all truth seekers be the vessels to carry consciousness study to new heights. References Chalmers, D. The Conscious Mind (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996). Hameroff, S. & Penrose, R. Conscious events as orchestrated spacetime selections. J. Conscious Stud., 1996; 3: 36-53. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Mechanism of anesthetic action: oxygen pathway perturbation hypothesis. Med. Hypotheses 2001a: 57: 619-627. Also see arXiv 2001b; physics/0101083. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin-mediated consciousness theory. arXiv 2002; quant-ph/0208068. Also see Med. Hypotheses 2004a: 63: 633-646. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin as primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2004b; 2:41-49. Also see Cogprints: ID2827 2003. ISSN: Hu, H. & Wu, M. Photon induced non-local effect of general anesthetics on the brain. NeuroQuantology 2006a 4: 17-31. Also see Progress in Physics 2006b; v3: 20-26. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Evidence of non-local physical, chemical and biological effects supports quantum brain. NeuroQuantology 2006c; 4: 291306. Also see Progress in Physics 2007; v2: 17-24. Planck, M. Interview with The Observer, London, Jan. 25, 1931. Planck, M. Speech at Florence, Italy, 1944. Rosenblum, B. & Kuttner, F. Quantum Enigma (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006). Stapp. H. P. Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1993). Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

1070 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Article Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Elio Conte (1,2)*, Orlando Todarello(3), Sergio Conte(2), Leonardo Mendolicchio(4), Antonio Federici(1) (1) Department of Pharmacology and Human Physiology – TIRES – Center for Innovative Technologies for Signal Detection and Processing, University of Bari- Italy; (2) School of Advanced Int‘l Studies for Applied Theoretical and Non Linear Methodologies of Physics, Bari, Italy; (3) Department of Neurological and Psychiatric Sciences, University of Bari - Italy (4) Department of Neurological and Psychiatric Sciences, University of Foggia - Italy ABSTRACT In the light of the results obtained during the last two decades in analysis of signals by time series, it has become evident that the tools of non linear dynamics have their elective role of application in biological, and, in particular, in neuro-physiological and psycho-physiological studies. The basic concept in non linear analysis of experimental time series is that one of recurrence whose conceptual counterpart is represented from variedness and variability that are the foundations of complexity in dynamic processes. Thus, the recurrence plots and the Recurrence Quantification Analysis (RQA) are discussed. It is shown that RQA represents the most general and correct methodology in investigation of experimental time series. By it we arrive to inspect the inner structure of the time series connected to the signals under investigation. Linked to RQA we prospect also the method CZF, recently introduced by us. It is able to account for a true estimation of variability of signals in time as well as in frequency domain. And, consequently, it may be used in conjunction with classical Fourier analysis, accounting however that it is inappropriate in analysis of non linear and non stationary experimental time series. The use of CZF method in fractal analysis is also considered in addition to standard index as Hurst exponent. A large field of possible applications in neurological as well as in psycho-physiological studies is given. Also, there are given examples of other and (possibly linked) applications as example the analysis of beat-to-beat fluctuations of human heartbeat intervals that is sovereign in psycho-physiological studies. We give applications on some different planes to evidence the particular sensitivity of such methods. We reach the objective to show that the previously exposed methods are also able to predict in advance the advent of ventricular tachycardia and/or of ventricular fibrillation. The RQA analysis gives good results. The CZF method gives the most excellent results showing that it is able to give very significant indexes of prediction. We also apply such methods in investigation of state anxiety, and proposing in detail a quantum like model of such phenomenological status of the mind. Key Words: non-linear analysis, time series, neurology, psycho-physiology, RQA, CZF, anxiety, quantum-like, mind. *Corresponding author: Elio Conte E-mail: elio.conte@fastwebnet.it ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1071 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology 1. The Recurrences and the Variability of Signals in Nature Only few systems in Nature exhibit linearity. The greatest whole of natural systems, especially those who pertain to biological matter, to physiological (neuro-physiological and psychophysiological) and to psychological processes, possess a complexity that results in a great variedness and variability, linked to non linearity, to non stationarity, and to non predictability of their time dynamics. In the time domain, traditional methods were first used to describe the amplitude distribution of signals and later, methodologies used spectral analysis methods. However, they suffer of fundamental limits. They are applied assuming linearity and stationarity of signals that actually do not exist. The consequence is that such methods are unable to analyse in a proper way the irregularity present in most of signals. The results show that such irregularity is at the basis of the dynamics that we intend to explore. It reveals that complex behaviours of the system are very distant from previously accepted principles as it is the case, as example for biological signals, on the view of homeostatic equilibrium and of other similar mechanism of controls. The study of this very irregular behaviour requires the introduction of new basic principles. Therefore, nonlinear science is becoming an emerging methodological and theoretical framework that makes up what is called the science of the complexity, often called also chaos theory. 2. The Chaos Theory The aim of non linear methodologies is a description of complexity and the exploration of the multidimensional interactions within and among components of given systems. An important concept here is that of chaotic behaviour. It will be defined chaotic if trajectories issuing from points of whatever degree of proximity in the space of phase, distance themselves from one another over time in an exponential way. In detail, the basic critical principles may be reassumed as it follows: 1) Non linear systems under certain conditions may exhibit chaotic behaviour; 2) The behaviour of a chaotic system can change drastically in response to small changes in the system‘s initial conditions; 3) A chaotic system is deterministic; 4) In chaotic systems the output system is no more proportionate to system input. Chaos may be identified in systems also excluding the requirement of determinism. The standard approach to classical dynamics assumes the Laplace point of view that the time evolution of a system is uniquely determined by it‘s initial conditions. Existence and uniqueness theorem of differential equations require that the equations of motion everywhere satisfy the Lipschitz condition. It has long been tacitly assumed that Nature is deterministic, and that correspondingly, the equations of motion describing physical systems are Lipschitz. However, there is no a priori reason to believe that Nature is unfailingly Lipschitzian. In very different conditions of interest, some systems exhibit physical solutions corresponding to equations of motion that violate the Lipschitz condition. The point is of particular interest. If a dynamical system is non-Lipschitz at a singular point, it is possible that several solutions will intersect at this point. This singularity is a common point among many trajectories, and the dynamics of the system, after the singular point ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1072 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology is intersected, is not in any way determined by the dynamics before. Hence the term nondeterministic dynamics takes place. For a non-deterministic system, it is entirely possible (if not likely) that as the various solutions move away from the singularity, they will evolve very differently, and tend to diverge. Several solutions coincide at the non-Lipschitz singularity, and therefore whenever a phase space trajectory comes near this point, any arbitrarily small perturbation may push the trajectory on to a completely different solution. As noise is intrinsic to any physical system, the time evolution of a non-deterministic dynamical system will consist of a series of transient trajectories, with a new one being chosen randomly whenever the solution (in the presence of noise) nears the non-Lipschitz point. We term such behaviour non-deterministic chaos. This approach to chaos theory was initiated by Zak, Zbilut and Webber [1] and rather recently we have given several examples, theoretical and experimental verifications on this important chaotic behaviour [2]. 2.1 Embedding time series in phase space The notion of phase space is well known in physics. Let us consider a system, determined by the set of its variables. Since they are known, those values specify the state of the system at any time. We may represent one set of those values as a point in a space, with coordinates corresponding to those variables. This construction of space is called phase space. The set of states of the system is represented by the set of points in the phase space. The question of interest is that we perform an analysis of the topological properties of phase space but, as a counterpart, we obtain insights into the dynamic nature of the system. In experimental conditions, especially in experimental clinical studies, we are unable to measure all the variables of the system. In this case we may be able to reconstruct equally a phase space from experimental data where only one of the present variables (characterizing the whole system) is actually measured. The phase space is realized by a set of independent coordinates. Generally speaking, the attractor is the phase space set generated by a dynamical system represented by a set of difference or differential equations. In the actual case, let us take a non linear dynamical system represented by three independent variables X (t ), Y (t ), Z (t ) , functions of time. The phase space set is given by the values of the variables at each time. The point ( x, y, z ) in phase space gives the values of the three variables and thus the state of the system at each time. Usually, in physics, for example, we plot one of the variables and its derivatives, dX d 2 X , , …. X, dt dt 2 (2.1) on the three perpendicular axes ( x, y, z ). The result is that we have reconstructed the phase space using only one of the three time series using also the derivatives of X (t ). This is a licit step since Y (t ) and Z (t ) are coupled to X (t ) through non linear equations. Consider that in experiments we have a fixed time sampling, t (time series recorded at equal time intervals), and the time series is given in the following manner X (0), X (t ), X (2t ), X (3t ),.............., X (nt ) (2.2) We could also differentiate such values determining dX / dt , d 2 X / dt 2 , …..but such a procedure ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1073 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology is unprofitable. In fact, also if our time series data should contain only very small errors in measurements, they should become larger errors during such operations. We may follow another procedure. We introduce a time lag   mt and consider each point in phase space, given by the following vector expression X ( t ), X ( t   ), X ( t  2 ), X ( t  3 ),.....X ( t  ( N 1 ) )  X N ( t ) (2.3) where N is the selected dimension of the phase space. Note that assuming such a procedure in phase space reconstruction we do not lose generality since, as it is easy to show, the coordinates of the phase space reconstructed in this manner, using time delays, are linear combinations of the derivatives. This procedure of reconstruction of phase space starting with the given time series is called embedding. This is the method presently used for reconstruction of phase space of experimentally sampled time series. Takens in 1981 [4] showed that this embedding method, based on time lags, is certainly valid under some suitable conditions. The first requirement is that the considered time series must be twice differentiable. If this requirement is not satisfied, and it happens often, when the considered time series is a fractal, the fractal dimension, calculated by the embedding method, may also not be equal to the true fractal dimension of the phase space set. Still, the other statement relating Takens theorem, requires that in a realistic reconstruction of phase space, say of dimension D , we must embed in a space of dimension ( 2D  1) in order to express enough dimensions. This is to avoid the possibility that the N  dimensional orbits intersect themselves in a false manner. 2.2 The Determination of Time Lag  Some different procedures may be followed to determine the time lag of the given time series in the embedding method. There are cases in which the appropriate choice of the time lag is rather simple. In fact, it may be seen from the basic features of the system under consideration. It is rather simple to evaluate the proper time lag if we are investigating physiological processes exhibiting with evidence their natural time scale. In other cases the estimation of the time lag may be not be so simple since we do not have a direct indication of the appropriate time lag. Let us consider, for example, the case of investigation of a physiological process involving electroencephalographic studies. Experience in methodological analysis of time series often helps to solve such problems. The problem must be solved with particular care. The proper choice of the time lag is of fundamental importance because in chaotic signals the relation between the dimension of an embedding space and real phase space is strongly linked to the length chosen for a time lag. A too large selected time lag will determine unwished noise in embedding and so the observation of the chaotic attractor will be strongly compromised. The use of a too small lag may result in strong correlations among the components of the signal (2.3), and the local geometry of embedding results much like as a line (i.e. dimension equal to 1), and damaging image reconstruction of the chaotic attractor. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1074 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology As a methodological praxis, it is useful to study the autocorrelation function of the given time series. Given the time series X (n), n=1, 2, ...N, the autocorrelation function, Au ( ) , at lag  is defined as: Au ( )  1 N   X ( n) X ( n   ) N   n1 (2.4) Values of time series correlate with themselves and the correlation diminishes as the time lag between two points increases. Correlation decreases with time. The time lag is selected as the autocorrelation function reaches its first zero. Often another useful criteria is to take the time lag as the autocorrelation function decreases to 1 / e  0.37. In addition to use of the autocorrelation function, one can employ the mutual information content, MI ( ) . Mean mutual information is given in the following manner [5] P( X (i), X (i   )) MI ( )   P ( X (i), X (i   )) log P( X (i))P( X (i   )) X ( i ), X ( i  ) (2.5) 2 The time at which the first local minimum of mutual information content is reached, may represent a good choice for time lag. Both Au ( ) and MI ( ) must be used, selecting the time lag provided by MI ( ) if Au ( ) and MI ( ) predict different results. This is preferable since MI ( ) also accounts for non linear contributions in a time series. 2.3 Embedding Theorem and False Nearest Neighbors As previously outlined, according to the embedding theorem (see Takens theorem for details), the choice of dimension N of reconstructed phase space should require a priori knowledge of the dimension d F of the original attractor with N  2d F . This is decisively unrealistic for time series of experimental data. Selecting N in absence of a given criterion, it may result in too small a choice as compared to the d F of the original attractor. It is possible to employ what is called the criterion of false nearest neighbors (FNN) in reconstructed phase space [6]. A point of data sets is said to be a FNN when it comprises the local nearest neighbors not actually but only because the orbit is constructed in a too small an embedded space determining its self-crossing. This difficulty may be overcome by adding sufficient coordinates to the embedding space. The criterion to use is to increase N in a step manner until the number of the FNN goes substantially to zero. Usually, a threshold of about 5% may be acceptable. Le us calculate the distance between two points in a selected embedding dimension of N , obtaining the value DN (i) . In the ( N  1) embedding dimension, we will have DN 1 (i) . Such values satisfy the following relation 2 X i  N  X iNN DN2 1 (i)  DN2 (i )  N  (2.6) 2 DN (i ) DN (i) where NN indicates that we consider a point selected conventionally near a given point. A fixed ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1075 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology threshold value is used and step by step it is verified if the (2.6) exceeds or not the prefixed threshold value. 3. Fractality and Non Linearity of Experimental Time Series 3.1 Fractality and Deterministic chaos of Time Series The use of non linear methods presumes that the signal under study is represented by an experimental time series relating a non linear system. Sometimes it possesses some deterministic features that may be also chaotic and must be investigated by the methodology discussed in the previous sections. Fractality refers to the features of a given stochastic time series. It shows temporal self-similarity. A time series is said self-similar if its amplitude distribution remains unchanged by a constant factor even when the sampling rate is changed. In the time domain one observes similar patterns at different time scales. In the frequency domain the basic feature of a fractal time series is its power law spectrum in the proper logarithmic scale. Fractals and chaos have many common points. When the phase space set is fractal, the system that generated the time series is chaotic. Chaotic systems can be arranged that generate a phase space set of a given fractal form. However, the systems and the processes studied by fractals and chaos are essentially different. Fractals must be considered processes in which a small section resembles the whole. The point in fractal analysis is to determine if the given experimental time series contains self-similar features. Deterministic chaos means that the output of a non linear deterministic system is so complex that in some manner mimes random behaviour. The point in deterministic chaos analysis is to investigate the given experimental time series that arises from a deterministic process and to understand in some manner the mathematical features of such a process. Regarding a chaotic time series, this means that the corresponding system has sensitivity to initial conditions. When we speak about strange attractors this means that the attractor is fractal [for details see 4]. It is very important to account for such properties since there are also chaotic systems that are not strange in the sense that they are exponentially sensitive to initial conditions but do not have a fractal attractor. Still we have non chaotic systems that are strange in the sense that they are not sensitive to initial conditions but they have a fractal attractor. In conclusion, we must be careful in considering fractals and non linear approaches since they are very different from each other. Often, instead, we are induced to erroneously mix different things with serious mistakes. The geometry of the attractors is frequently examined by calculating the so called correlation dimension [7]. The self-similar property of the attractor is estimated by the scaling behaviour of the correlation integral C N (r )  1  (r  X N (i)  X N ( j) ) n 2 i j where  () is 1 for positive arguments and 0 for negative arguments. For a fixed a sphere of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1076 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology radius r , in the reconstructed phase space C N (r ) gives the normalized number of points in it. For stochastic signals the correlation integral, calculated in the N  dimensional space, scales as C N (r )  r N For bounded signals there is a finite scaling exponent so that C N (r )  r d with d  N . The correlation dimension, usually indicated by D2 , is calculated as the slope of the linear behaviour of log r vs. log C N (r ) . The value 1.0 is obtained in the case of a limit cycle, 2.0 instead is calculated in the case of a torus. A calculated non- integer value instead indicates that the phase space has a fractal geometry. However, in analysis of experimental time series the calculation of the correlation dimension does not offer results sensitive enough to conclude that for a non-integer, a fractal dimension that could be generated by a deterministic chaotic system. Stochastic signals may mimic chaotic data and furthermore, time series of stationary data are always required. This last requirement is rarely obtained by experimental time series, especially those of biological or physiological interest. 3.2 Estimation of Lyapunov Exponents As previously mentioned, chaotic systems show a dynamics where phase space trajectories with nearly identical initial states will, however, separate from each other at an exponentially increasing rate. This is usually called the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in chaotic deterministic systems. The spectrum of the Lyapunov exponents captures this basic feature of the dynamics of these systems. We may consider the two nearest neighboring points in phase space at time 0 and at time t. Let us consider also a direction i-th in space. Let  x i ( 0 ) be the distance at time 0 and  xi ( t ) the distance at time t. The Lyapunov exponent, i (direction ith), will be calculated such that [8]  xi ( t )  e t  xi ( 0 ) i for t   that is equivalent to 1 t  t i  lim Ln  xi ( t )  xi ( 0 ) It is possible to reconstruct the Lyapunov spectrum accounting for all the directions in phase space. Chaotic systems are characterized by having at least one positive Lyapunov exponent while their sum generally must be negative. Given there is a whole spectrum of Lyapunov ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1077 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology exponents, the number of them is equal to the number of dimensions of the phase space. If the system is conservative (i.e. there is no dissipation), a volume element of the phase space will stay the same along a trajectory. Thus the sum of all Lyapunov exponents must be zero. If the system is dissipative, the sum of Lyapunov exponents is negative. The Lyapunov spectrum can be used also to give an estimate of the rate of entropy production and of the fractal dimension of the considered dynamical system. In particular from the knowledge of the Lyapunov spectrum it is possible to obtain the so-called Kaplan-Yorke dimension DKY, that is defined as follows: i i 1  k 1 k DKY  k   where k is the maximum integer such that the sum of the k largest exponents is still non-negative. DKY represents an upper bound for the information dimension of the system. Moreover, the sum of all the positive Lyapunov exponents gives an estimate of the Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy accordingly to Pesin's theorem [9] In conclusion, the Lyapunov exponent is a measure of the rate at which nearby trajectories in phase space diverge. Chaotic orbits show at least one positive Lyapunov exponent. Instead periodic orbits all give negative Lyapunov exponents. It is of interest also the analysis of a Lyapunov exponent equal to zero. It says that we are near a bifurcation. There is still another feature to outline. It is common to avoid to calculating the whole Lyapunov spectrum, estimating instead only the most positive one, usually refered to as the largest one. A positive value is normally taken as indication that the system is chaotic. The inverse of the largest Lyapunov exponent is sometimes referred to in the literature as Lyapunov time, and defines the characteristic folding time. For chaotic orbits it is finite, whereas for regular orbits it will be infinite. Finally, to quantify predictability of the system, the rate of divergence of the trajectories in phase space must be evaluated by Lyapunov exponents and Kolmogorov-Sinai entropy. Under the perspective of the analysis one must account for the calculation of Lyapunov exponents from limited experimental data of time series. Various methods have been proposed [10]. Generally speaking, however, these methods may be sensitive to variations in parameters, e.g., number of data points, embedding dimension, reconstructed time delay, and are usually reliable with care. 3.3 The Method of Surrogate Data in Time Series At this stage of the present exposition, the reader will have realized that the most unfavourable snare in the investigation of experimental time series, possibly chaotic, is that the methods we have at our availability, are inclined to give similar results in the case of deterministic chaotic dynamics and stochastic noise so that distinguishing deterministic chaos from noise becomes an important problem. Starting with a given experimental time series, stochastic surrogate data may be generated having the same power spectra as the original one, but having random phase relationship among the Fourier components. If any numerical procedure in studying deterministic-chaotic dynamics will produce the same results for surrogate data as well as for the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1078 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology original ones within a prefixed criterion, we will not reject the null hypothesis that the analyzed dynamics is determiend by a linear stochastic model rather than to be represneted by deterministic chaos. Often the method of the shuffled data is used. Data of the original time series are shuffled, and this operation preserves the probability distribution but produces generally a very different power spectrum and correlation function. 3.4 Fractional Brownian Analysis in Time Seires It is well knwn that the study of stochastic processes with power-law spectra started with the celebrated paper on fractional Brownian motion (fBm) by Mandelbrot and Van Ness in 1968 [11]. Fixing the initial conditions, fBm is defined by the following equation d X (ht )  h H X (t ) (3.1) Given a self-similar fractal time series, (3.1) establishes that the distribution remains unchanged d by the factor h H even after the time scale is changed. (  ) states that the statistical distribution function remains unchanged. H is called Hurst exponent, varying as 0  H  1 , and it characterizes the general power – law scaling. For an additive process of Gaussian white noise, we have H  0.5 . H values greater than 0.5 indicate persistence in time series. This is to say that a past trend persists into the future(long-range correlation). Instead, H values less than 0.5 indicate antipersistence and this is to say that past trends tend to reverse in the future. The fBm also exhibits power-law behaviour in the Fourier spectrum. There is a linear relationship between the log of spectral power vs. log of frequency. The inverse of the slope in the log-log plot is called the spectral exponent  ( 1 / f  behaviour), and it is related to H by the following relationship H  1 2 4. Recurrence Quantification Analysis and the CZF Method 4.1 Introduction Let us take up some of the concepts exposed in the previous sections. It was outlined that the most important concept in studies of nonlinear processes by time series is that one of recurrence. A recurrence plot is the visualization of a square recurrence matrix of distance elements within a cutoff limit. We outlined also the importance of Takens theorem relating higher dimensional reconstruction of signals by the method of time delay. It is important to reaffirm here that the topological features of a higher dimensional system consisting of multiple coupled variables may be reconstructed from a single measured variable. We measure only one of these variables, and correspondingly we obtain important information on the whole system underlying the dynamics. The reconstruction happens in the phase space. Let us discuss an example previously introduced in [3] to illustrate the importance of the approach. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1079 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Let us take a single lead of the ECG recorded signal. We have in this manner an ECG signal in its one dimensional representation of voltage as a function of time. A digitised time series is obtained. Actually ECG derives from summed cardiac potentials that act simultaneously under the frontal, the saggital and the horizontal orthogonal planes, and thus along three dimensions. In order to have an accurate representation of the ECG signal, we need to simultaneously record voltages in time in these three orthogonal planes. However, if we perform a reconstruction plotting 1-dimensional data again itself and twice delayed, that is to say, delayed by  and 2 , on a three axis plot, the signal is represented as the reconstructed 3-dimensional space. Topologically, these loops are the same thing as the simultaneous plotting of three orthogonal recorded ECG leads. In the previous sections, we outlined that in order to realize such a methodology we need to estimate properly the time delay and the embedding dimension. In analysis, recurrence is the most important concept. Of course, variedness and variability relate the complexity of a given dynamics. In recurrence analysis one must define some parameters that are the range, the norm, the rescaling and, finally, the radius, and the line. The range defines a window on the dynamics under investigation, selecting the starting point and the ending point in the time series to be analysed. For the norm, one has to distinguish the minimum norm, the maximum and the Euclidean norms. The norm function geometrically defines the size and the shape of the neighborhood surrounding each reference point. The Euclidean norm defines the Euclidean distance between paired points in phase space. The rescaling relates the fact that the distance matrix can be rescaled by dividing each element in the distance matrix by either the mean distance or maximum distance of the whole matrix. Finally, the radius is expressed in units relative to the elements in the distance matrix, whether or not these elements have been rescaled. The line parameter is decisive when we have to extract quantitative features from recurrence plots We have a length of a recurrence feature and a prefixed line parameter so that such features may be rejected in quantitative analysis if it results are shorter than selected line parameter. 4.2 The Recurrence Quantification Analysis Recurrence analysis was first introduced by Eckmann, Kamphorst and Ruelle in 1987 [12], A recurrence quantification analysis, indicated by RQA, was subsequently introduced by Zbilut and Webber [13] and further enriched by the introduction of other variables by Marwan [14]. An exceptional element of value of RQA is that this method has no restrictions in its applications: as we will explain later, for example it may be applied also to non stationary time series. The first recurrence variable is the % Recurrence (%REC). %REC quantifies the percentage of recurrent points falling within the specified radius. Out of any doubt we may define it the most important variable in analysis of time series. The second recurrence variable is the % Determinism (%DET). %DET measures the proportion of recurrent points forming diagonal line structures. Diagonal line segments must have a minimum length in relation to above line parameter. Repeating or deterministic patterns are characterized by this variable. Periodic signals will give long diagonal lines. Instead chaotic signals will give very short diagonal lines. Stochastic signals will not determine diagonal lines unless a very high value of the radius will be selected. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1080 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology The third recurrence variable is the MaxLine (LMAX). It is the length of the longest diagonal line segment in the plot excluding obviously the main diagonal line of identity. This is a variable of interest since it inversely scales with the most positive Lyapunov exponent previously discussed. Therefore, the shorter the maxline results, the more chaotic the signal is. In addition, RQA may be performed by epochs, so that LMAX enables evaluation of Lyapunov exponent locally. The other important recurrence variable is entropy (ENT). It relates Shannon information entropy of all the diagonal line lengths distributed over integer bins in a histogram. ENT may be considered a measure of the signal complexity and is given in bits/bin. For simple periodic systems with all diagonal lines of equal length and the entropy is expected to go to zero. Another decisive variable in RQA is the trend (TND). All the above methods discussed in the previous sections hold for stationary time series. This is a condition rarely met in analysis of experimental time series and especially in the field of biological signals. RQA may be applied for any kind of experimental time series including non stationary time series. This is one of the reasons to appreciate the RQA method. The trend (TND) still quantifies the degree of non stationarity of the time series under investigation. If recurrent points are homogeneously distributed across the recurrence plot, TND values will approach zero. If they are heterogeneously distributed across the recurrence plot, TND values will result different from zero. The sixth important variable in RQA, introduced by Marwan [14] is %Laminarity (%LAM). %LAM measures the percentage of recurrent points in vertical line structures rather than diagonal line structures. Finally, the Trapping Time (TT) measures the average length of vertical line structures. Square areas (really a combination of vertical and diagonal lines) indicate laminar (singular) areas, possibly intermittency, suggesting transitional regimes, chaos-ordered, chaoschaos transitions. In conclusion, RQA may be considered at the moment the most powerful method for analysis of any kind of time series without limitations of any kind. The confirmation is in the large and growing interest in literature for such a methodology over the last decade. Several fields have been explored by RQA from general chaos science to proper fields of application as clinical electro-physiology [see as example 15], molecular dynamics, psychology and mind pathologies [see for example 16], finance, just to list only some of the several fields impacted by this non linear methodology of analysis. 4.3 Further Advances in Analysis of Variability in Time Series: the CZF method As previously indicated, complexity of natural processes relates the variedness and the variability of the experimentally measured signals in the form of time series. The CZF method relates this feature, and it derives from the surname (Conte, Zbilut, Federici) of the authors who introduced it. Let us recall an old notion. The presence of an harmonic component in a given time series is ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1081 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology revealed by its power spectrum P( ) given by the squared norm of the Fourier transform of the given time series X (t ) as  2 P( )   e X (t )dt i t (4.1) 0 and evidences sharp peaks. FFT (Fast Fourier Transform), in its discrete version, is currently applied in analysis of non linear time series. All we know that, because of its simplicity, Fourier analysis has dominated and still dominates the data analysis efforts. This happens ignoring the fact that FFT is valid under extremely general conditions but essentially under the respect of some crucial restrictions that often result largely violated, especially in the field of the electrophysiological signals. Three stringent conditions must be observed: 1) the system under investigation must be linear. 2) The data of the time series under investigation must be strictly periodic and stationary. 3) All the data of the time series under investigation must be sampled at equally spaced time intervals. The consequences of such improper use of the FFT are significant. In particular, the presence of non linearity and of non stationarity give little sense to the results that are obtained. Consequently we will discuss now a non linear method, the CZF. It was previously introduced by us in literature [17], and it presents, conceptual links with RQA. Let us start with Hurst analysis [18] that brings light on some statistical properties of time series X (t ) that scale with an observed period of observation T and a time resolution  . As previously shown, scaling results characterized by an exponent H that relates the long-term statistical dependence of the signal. In substance, one may generalize such Hurst approach, expressing the scaling behaviour of statistically significant properties of the signal. Indicating by E the mean values, we have to analyze the q-order moments of the distribution of the increments K q ( )  E ( X (t   )  X (t ) q (4.2) q E ( X (t ) ) The (4.2) represents the statistical time evolution of the given stochastic variable X (t ) . For q=2, we may re-write the (4.2) in the following manner 2 1 n(h)  ( h)   X (uih )  X (ui ) 2n(h) i 1 (4.3) that estimates the variogram of the given time series. Here, n(h) is the number of pairs at lag distance h while X (u i ) and X (ui  h ) are time sampled series values at times t and t  h , ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1082 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology t  u1 , u 2 ,.... ; h  1,2,3,..... . In substance, the variogram is a statistical measure expressed in the form:  (h)  Var X (u  h)  X (u ) 1 2 (4.4) The variogram here introduced represents the a valuable measure of complexity in a given non linear time series and at the same time its elaboration enables us to overcome the difficulties previously mentioned for use of the FFT in non stationary and non linear time series. The concept of variability is sovereign in this case. Let us take an example to illustrate its relevance. Let us admit we have a time series given only by six terms: X1, X 2 , X 3 , X 4 , X 5 , X 6 . (4.5) The first time we select time lag h  1, and using the (4.3) we calculate variability of this signal at this time scale, obtaining: ( X 1  X 2) 2  ( X 2  X 3 ) 2  ( X 3  X 4 ) 2  ( X 4  X 5 ) 2  ( X 5  X 6 ) 2 (4.6) This is the variability of the signal at time scale h  1 and, in accord with the (4.3), we indicate it by  1 (h)   1 (1) . Note some important features: The differences ( X i  X i 1 ) 2 in the (4.6) will account directly for the fluctuations (and thus of the total variability) that intervene in X i 1 with respect to X i . It will be due to the particular features of the dynamics under investigation. Let us consider for example the case of (4.5) representing the beat-to-beat fluctuations of human heartbeat intervals. The (4.6) will represent total variability in time lag h  1 due to the regulative activity exercised by sympathetic, vagal, and VLF activities in the time lag considered. Still, the count of such variability will happen for all the points of the given time series and thus it will account for the total variability at the fixed time scale of resolution for the whole considered R–R process. Finally, if  1 (1) will assume a value going to zero, we will conclude that at such time scale (time lag delay h = 1) the variability of the signal in this time lag is very modest. Otherwise, if  1 (1) is different from zero in a consistent way, we will conclude that it gives great variability, attributed to the presence of a relevant activity of control. In the same way we will proceed considering for example (4.5) to represent an EEG signal recorded at some electrode at a given sampling frequency. In this case, (4.6) represents the total variability in cerebral activity at the selected electrode and at the time resolution of h  1. After to having computed the total variability of signals at this time resolution h  1, we will continue our calculation evaluating this time the total variability of the signal at the time resolution h  2 , and thus calculating  2 (2) . In a similar way we will proceed calculating total variability at the time scale resolution corresponding to h  3 and so on, completing the analysis of variability at each time scale. In conclusion we will ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1083 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology calculate the final variability of the given signal step by step at different time scales. The result will be a diagram in a plot in which in axis of the ordinate we will have the values of variability (in its corresponding unity of measurement) while in the axis of the abscissa we will have the corresponding value of h , that is to say of the corresponding time resolution. Note that, in order to calculate the final value of the total variability we may decide (at time lag h  1 but so also at the following steps) to divide (4.6) by the number of pairs employed in the calculation. In this manner we will obtain the mean value of variability at such time scale. To complete our exposition on the CZF method we must still outline that, in calculating  i (h) we may also use the embedding procedure for reconstruction in phase space and thus performing in this case a more elaborate and significant exploration of the time series under investigation. From a methodological view point we may still outline that by the CZF method we may perform also fractal analysis of the given time series. In fact we may use the Fractal Variance Function,  (h), and the Generalized Fractal Dimension, Ddim , by the following equation  (h)  Ch Ddim (4.7) and finally estimating the Marginal Density Function for self-affine distributions, given by the following equation [19]: P(h)  ak  a h a 1 (4.8) This last consideration completes our exposition on CZF method. It remains to be explained the manner in which the CZF method overcomes the difficulties previously noted in the case of FFT and thus the manner in which it must be applied to perform an analysis of variability in the frequency domain. To illustrate such a methodology we will use two basic examples: the first is the case of HRV, that is the analysis of heart rate variability by using time series of R-R intervals from the ECG. The second example will relate the analysis of variability of brain waves in EEG in the frequency domain. 4.4 An Example of Application of CZF method in HRV analysis of R-R time series from ECG It is well known that R-R time series relate the beat-to-beat time fluctuations of human heartbeat intervals and R-R values are largely controlled by various physiological and psychological factors and, in particular, by the balance between sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system activity imposed upon the spontaneous discharge frequency of the sinoatrial node.R-R analysis is largely used in psycho-physiological studies. We quote only two papers to outline the importance of such field. The first is an analysis of cardiac signature of emotionality as quoted in ref.24. The second is an analysis of heart period variability and depressive symptoms:gender differences as quoted in ref.25. Fluctuations in time in R-R result in what we call the variability of the R-R signal and, using the FFT, in the frequency domain three bands are identified. The first, the VLF, is usually considered ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1084 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology to range from 0 to 0.04 Hz and related to humoral regulation of the sinus pacemaker cell activity and to other contributing factors; the second, the LF, ranging from 0.04 to 0.15 Hz, and the HF, ranging from 0.15 to 0.4 Hz are roughly correlated to autonomic sympathetic and vagal activities, respectively. To perform analysis of variability by CZF in the frequency domain we calculate the mean value, E ( R  R) , in msec. Consequently we will estimate an equivalent frequency f equivalent  1 E ( R  R) Finally, we realize the final diagram having on the ordinate the values of the variability as calculated by (4.3) and on the abscissa, in correspondence with each lag , h , we will assign instead the value hf equivalent with h  1,2,3,.... We will now apply the CZF method to the case of the beat-to-beat fluctuations of human hearthbeat intervals in the cases of normal subjects and subjects with pathologies. We will give the CZF results after having performed the analysis of the given R-R time series using also the previously explained other methodologies. We selected four groups of five subjects. Data were taken from Physionet [20]. Let us delineate some features of the experimental data. The first two groups, Yi and Oi (i=1, 2, 3, 4, 5), are young and old subjects, respectively. Young subjects were (21 – 34) years old and old subjects were (68 – 85) years old. Men and women were included in the two groups All were rigorously-screened and found to be healthy subjects. ECG recording was performed for 120 minutes of continuous supine resting. The continuous ECG, respiration, and (where available) blood pressure signals were digitized at 250 Hz. Each heartbeat was annotated using an automated arrhythmia detection algorithm, and each beat annotation was verified by visual inspection. We selected pieces of 1024 R-R data points corresponding to a time interval of about thirteen minutes. For the other two groups, Vti and Vfi, instead pieces of 1024 data points of R-R time intervals were chosen immediately before the advent of an episode of ventricular tachycardia (Vt) and ventricular fibrillation (Vf). The first step was to apply the embedding procedure for phase space reconstruction of the given R-R signals. As previously explained, we calculated first the Autocorrelation Function (Au), then the Mean Mutual Information (MI) to select a proper time delay . When the results predicted by Au and MI were different, we opted for the time delay as predicted from MI. After this step, we proceeded to the final phase space reconstruction by using the criterion of False Nearest Neighbors (FNN) fixing a threshold value. In order to give some indication, in Figures 1a, 1b, 1c, we give the AutoCorrelation function (Au), MI, and FNN results for some subject of group Yi, In Figures 2a, 2b, 2c, the corresponding results for a subject of group Oi, and, finally, in Figures 3a, 3b, 3c, and Figures 4a, 4b, 4c, those for a subject in group Vti and a subject in group Vfi, respectively. All the results are given in Table 1. In spite of different values obtained for Au, it may be seen that rather constant values of time delays were obtained by using MI. They ranged between 1 and 3 for young and old healthy subjects with an embedding dimension that resulted in ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1085 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology being constantly equal to 5 for young subjects, and constantly equal to 4 for old subjects. The subjects in Vt gave time delays ranging between 2 and 4 but this time the embedding dimension resulted in varying from 2 to 7. Vf subjects gave time delays between 2 and 4 but the embedding dimension varied from 2 to 8. Phase space reconstruction resulted in rather homogeneous results in the group of normal subjects, the Oi group, and the Yi group, with differences in embedding dimension in old subjects (embedding dimension equal to 4) with respect to young subjects (embedding dimension equal to 5). Instead, marked differences arose in the groups Vt and Vf, in the inner of the two groups and with respect to old normal subjects, Oi. Usually, the reconstructed dimension may be indicative of the number of basic variables that are involved in the system under consideration. The obtained results indicate that young subjects show differences with respect to old subjects relative to the number of basic variables involved but such differences are rather moderate. In the case of the two investigated pathologies we are in presence of a very different dynamics and attractor features in the inner of the groups relative to controls. All the arising differences lead to an interpretation in terms of a profound modification and alteration and of a more marked complexity of the dynamics in the Vt and the Vf cases compared to normal subjects. The results indicate that in some cases a larger number of variables while in other cases a smaller number of variables is required. This is indicative of the profound alteration that the two pathologies induce in heart dynamics, compared to the cases of normal subjects. The second step was to calculate the largest Lyapunov exponent. For brevity, we avoided calculating the whole Lyapunov spectrum. The results are reported in Table 2. All the subjects gave positive values for the exponent. This may be indicative of the presence of chaotic regimes. It may be seen that young subjects gave values trending higher compared to old subjects. Signals immediately before Ventricular Fibrillation gave discordant results in the sense that in one case we had the lowest value of the Lyapunov exponent of the whole experimentation but we had also cases with values very similar to the high values that were obtained in the case of young subjects. On the contrary, signals immediately before Ventricular Tachycardia gave rather low results in two cases. The other remaining values are similar to those previously obtained for the old healthy subjects. In conclusion we had also in this case (as well as in the case of phase space reconstruction) a net variability in the results in the case of pathologies and a rather constant behaviour of  E in the case of normal subjects. In our interpretation these results confirmed that the investigated pathologies induce a profound modification and alteration in the dynamics of the two investigated processes compared to normal cases. The statistical results are given also in Table 2. It is seen that we have significant differences in the case of young subjects vs. old subjects. These are interesting results since, as also outlined in previous papers by other authors [21], this means that the new paradigmatic rule in dynamics of R-R signals is its variability. Young subjects demonstrate a dynamics of R-R intervals that is based on a greater variability compared to old subjects. Age effects on beat-to beat fluctuations in human interbeat intervals involve a progressive reduction of variability and, in accord, we find a statistically significant difference in Largest Lyapunov Exponent between young and old subjects. We find also statistically significant differences in old subjects about thirteen minutes before the advent of an episode of ventricular tachycardia. This is a remarkable result. In fact, it says that we have an index,  E , that ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1086 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology is able to inform us in advance on the future advent of a so severe an episode in human heart dynamics. Unfortunately, such predictive value is not obtained also in the case of the Ventricular Fibrillation which in fact does not show significant differences compared to the case of old subjects. Other details are given in Table 2. As third step of our analysis, we must now examine the structure of the investigated signals, and this kind of analysis may be performed by employing the RQA. Let us remember that we calculate a Recurrence Plot and the following variables of interest: the %Rec, the %DET, the %Lam, the T.T., the Entropy, the MaxLine, the Trend. Modifying slightly our previous language, we may reconsider here some of the variables. In particular, the recurrence rate estimates the probability of recurrence of a certain state. Stochastic behaviours cause very short diagonals while deterministic behaviours determine longer diagonals. Consequently, the ratio of recurrence points forming diagonals to all recurrence points, estimates the determinism. Diagonal structures show the range in which a part of the trajectory is rather close to another one at a different time. Therefore, the diagonal length is the time span they will be close and their mean represents the mean prediction time. The inverse of the maximal length line may be interpreted as the maximal positive Lyapunov exponent. The entropy is defined as the Shannon entropy in the histogram of diagonal line lengths. We may also compute the ratio between the recurrence points forming a vertical structures and the whole set of recurrence points. This variable is called Laminarity, and it related to the amount of laminar states and intermittency. In dynamical systems, intermittency is the alternation of phases of apparently periodic and chaotic dynamics. This is useful for the study of transitions (chaos-ordered, or chaos-chaos transitions). (TT), which is the mean length of vertical lines, measures the mean time that the system is trapped in one state or change only very slowly. This is the basic scheme of RQA. We see that by this set of variables, we may actually explore the inner structure of the given signal, and this is the reason because RQA is so important in analysis of non linear dynamics in signals. We may now return to consider the specific cases under our investigation. We performed the RQA analysis using a Radius R=20 so to maintain %Rec about 2-4% . This is a methodological attitude that is often usefull in such analysis. We selected a Line L=3, and we used Euclidean distance and mean rescaling. In Figures 5, 6, 7, 8 we give an example of recurrence plot for a subject of Yi, Oi, Vti, Vfi, respectively. The results of the RQA investigation are given in Table 3. In Table 4 we have instead the statistical analysis of the RQA results. Before inspection of recurrence plots, we remember the meaning of diagonal lines and in particular the fact that square areas, really a combination of vertical and diagonal lines, indicate laminar areas, intermittency, possibly suggesting transitional regimes as previously discussed. Still, let us observe that in Tables 3 and 4 we introduced a new variable, the Ratio = %Det / %Rec. We see that the signals employed in the investigation have actually a different inner structure. As expected, young subjects give statistically significant different results compared to old subjects for Laminarity, Trapping Time, Entropy, and Max Line. In brief, the two kinds of signals have a very different structure. Statistically significant differences are obtained also in the case of R-R of old subjects compared to R-R of old subjects before the advent of ventricular ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1087 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology tachycardia, and this happens for Determinism, Laminarity, Entropy, and MaxLine. This is a remarkable result since by it we are in the condition to anticipate the event. We may predict in advance the advent of ventricular tachycardia. Still, statistically significant differences are obtained in the case of old subjects compared to old subjects with ventricular fibrillation. In this case it is the Ratio variable this is indicative. Finally, we observe that the structure of the two signals, one before the advent of ventricular tachycardia and the other before the advent of ventricular fibrillation, show significant differences, and this happens for Determinism, and Laminarity. Also this last result is remarkable since it suggests that we have two profoundly different pathologies that may be better studied and understood on the basis of such two variables. This last observation completes our RQA investigation. In conclusion, we have given a number of important results relating the different structure and the dynamics of the signals under investigation. They all show relevant features that certainly will not fail to be studied and interpreted with care in their proper physiological and clinical context. Let us conclude with the results obtained by our CZF method. Following the CZF methodology, we calculated the variogram using 1021 lags. On this basis we evaluated the most important parameter of the method, that is, the Total Variability (VT) of the given time series. It was expressed as the square root ot the total variability of the signal obtained for each lag. Therefore the results are expressed in sec. We also calculated the variogram distribution in the frequency domain, in substitution of the classical Fourier transform. Thus, we calculated the variability of R-R in sec2 in the three bands of interest, VLF, LF, and HF. The results are given in Table 5. In Table 6 we give the results for statistical analysis (t-Test) and in Table 7 those for correlation analysis. First, let us comment the Total Variability, VT. In the cases under investigation, it shows that young subjects, as expected, show a greater VT compared to old subjects. This parameter increases remarkably in R-R time series before the advent of ventricular fibrillation and of ventricular tachycardia. The statistical analysis reveals that we have a very significant difference in young subjects with respect to old subjects, and, particularly, in old subjects with respect to those with future ventricular fibrillation and in those with future ventricular tachycardia. We may conclude to have found an excellent predictive parameter that is able to anticipate the advent of severe events in hearth dynamics. In addition, we find also that statistically significant differences are maintained for VT in young subjects compared to old subjects for VLF, LF and HF bands in the frequency domain. Still, significant differences are found in old subjects compared to subjects with future ventricular tachycardia for LF and HF bands. In order to go on in the understanding of such complex phenomena relating pathologies, we have also performed a correlation analysis finding other remarkable results. In young subjects VT results correlated in a significant manner with VLF, LF, and HF. In itself, this result does not appear to be so relevant. It becomes of particular interest when we consider also the results of correlation analysis for old subjects. In fact, in this case we obtain that the total variability of the signals correlates with LF and HF but not with with VLF. This is a very interesting conclusion that deserves to be explained and interpreted in detail under the physiological and clinical ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1088 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology profiles. Finally, we obtain still results of particular significance when we apply the correlation analysis to the case of future ventricular fibrillation and of future ventricular tachycardia. In fact, in the case of future ventricular fibrillation we find that correlation maintains between VT and VLF, between VT and LF, and between VT and HF, but in the case of ventricular tachycardia, correlation maintains only between VT and VLF, and between VT and VLF/(LF+HF). These results evidence in a quantitative manner the profound alterations that intervene in health dynamics soon before the advent of ventricular fibrillation and of ventricular tachycardia but also clear in detail the substantial differences that characterize the two pathologies. Certainly, there is here matter for physiologists and clinicians to find a proper understanding and interpretation of such results giving new insights in this matter. To complete the present section we must still add something about the fractal dynamics of the investigated R-R time series. We previously outlined that a Generalized Fractal Dimension may be calculated by employing the CZF method. Otherwise, and for reason of brevity, we calculated in this section the Hurst exponent. The results are given in Table 8 where is also presented the statistical analysis. Also the analysis of Hurst exponet furnishes relevant results. Using this methodology, it is found that ventricular fibrillation and ventricular tachycardia profoundly modify health dynamics just before of their advent. In fact, by inspection of Tables 8, we see that the values of the Hurst exponent all remain under the value of 0.5, and this result shows that the regime of such R-R time series is of antipersistence and thus of absence of long range correlation. In addition we see that we have statistically significant differences between values in young and old subjects. In addition, very significant differences are found between old subjects and old subjects with future ventricular tachycardia. At the same time very significant differences hold also between old subjects and those with future ventriculat fibrillation. Therefore, we obtain an excellent parameter of prediction of future severe failure in heart dynamics. The reason for such results is that the advent of the mentioned pathologies profoundly alters the fractal structure of the signals taken in consideration in Vt and in Vf. In conclusion, our analysis offers an excellent set of parameters that may be considered as predictive of ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation. 4.5 The Application of the CZF Method in Analysis of Spontaneous EEG We called this method as CZKF because its formulation was enriched also by the contributions of another author [17]. We are accustomed to analyse brain patterns of subjects by standard methodologies. Specifically, subjects are instructed to close their eyes and relax. Brain patterns are recorded as wave shapes that commonly show sinusoidal like behaviour. They are measured from peak to peak with a normal ranging from 0.5 to 100 μV. EEG records may be obtained by positioning 21 or more electrodes on the intact scalp and thus recording the changes of the electrical field within the brain. Generally, even up to 128 and more EEG channels can be displayed simultaneously and each corresponding to a standard electrode position on the scalp. The results of EEG signals are usually registered as voltage differences between pairs of electrodes with bipolar leads or between an active electrode and a suitably constructed reference electrode. The problem in analysing EEG is to provide a proper method to extract its basic quantitative features by accurate procedures. The research regarding the methodology began more than 70 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1089 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology years ago. The basic tool was, and still remains Fourier analysis. The brain states of subjects demonstrate some dominant frequencies; namely: 1) beta waves (12-30 Hz) 2) alpha waves (8-12 Hz) 3) theta waves (4-8 Hz) 4) delta waves (0.5-4 Hz) Over the last two decades the traditional Fourier analysis has been enriched by other methods, including the widespread application of time-frequency methods for signal analysis such as the Wavelet Transform (WT), and the Hilbert transform. These applications have enjoyed varying results. Because of its simplicity, Fourier analysis has dominated and still dominates data analysis efforts. Despite this, as it was outlined in the previous sections, it should be widely recognized that the Fourier transform assumes crucial restrictions which are often violated also in the EEG time series. The consequences of improper FFT use are significant: the resulting spectrum will make little physical and physiological sense. The brain has an average density of about 104 neurons per cubic mm. Neurons are mutually connected into neural nets through synapses. Subjects have about 500 trillion (5×1014) synapses, and the number of synapses per one neuron increases with age while the number of neurons decreases with age. Thus although rather structurally simple, the interconnections produce one of the most massive (functional) structures existing in nature. The natural way to think of this structure is that of a dynamic system governed by laws of non linearity and of non stationarity. We are in presence of a very complex system that again shows a great variedness and variability. Consequently, any method of analysis must quantify these features in order to generate valuable results. To this purpose we propose the CZKF method. Obviously, the basic feature of the CZKF method is that by it we must estimate the variability that one has in the EEG for each band in a given time interval. This represents the new and important feature of the method. By CZKF we have the opportunity for the first time to evaluate with accuracy the variability of EEG in each of the bands characterizing the brain waves of interest. In this case we will express total variability in microvolts, obviously. Consider an EEG sampled at 250 Hz. First of all we will calculate the variogram for different lags, h, as previously explained in detail. We will realize a diagram in which we have the values of the variogram in y-axis (ordinate) and correspondingly the h − lag − values on the x-axis (abscissa). Soon after the step will be that one of a conversion of variogram values from time to frequency domain. We proceed in the following manner: 1  0.004 sec 250 Hz In this manner ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1090 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology 1 0.004(lag  h  value  1) will represent the frequency with the corresponding value of variability at 250 Hz. Similarly, 1  125Hz 0.004  2(lag  value) will represent the value of variability at 125 Hz, and so on for lag values h = 3,4,5,..... . In this manner we may reconstruct the variability of the EEG time series data as a function of the frequency. Analysis of brain waves will be performed by integration of the calculated variability in each of the four groups of brain waves previously reported summing for each characteristic frequency band. In this manner we will estimate also P( f )  1 / f  This last discussion completes the exposition of some features of our method. It may be applied to EEG as well as to ERP. In our previous papers [17], we examined eight normal subjects (5 female and 3 male with age ranging from 21 to 28 years old). All the subjects were at rest, watchful but with closed eyes. The sampling frequency was at 250 Hz. We focused our analysis on the following electrodes: CZ, FZ, O2, and T4. Phase space reconstruction is useless in our case since we had the electrodes positioned on the scalp and their space separation corresponds to time delay. We used the Euclidean Norm that is the time series reconstructed as xC2 Z (t )  x F2Z (t )  xO2 2 (t )  xT24 (t )  X EEG (t ) and we calculated the variogram of X EEG (t ) at the various lags and subsequently the results were converted into Hz. 30000 points of EEG were used, corresponding to 2 minutes of recorded brain activity. The results are reported in Fig. 9 and in Table 9. It gives an accurate reconstruction of the variability of brain activity in the four bands of interest that are the beta, alpha, theta and delta brain waves. Obviously the method fully substitutes the less appropriate application of FFT, Wavelet, Hilbert transformations and other linear applications. Finally, we aim to outline here the interest of our CZKF method also in applications in cognitive studies, in analysis of IQ or also, for example, and to evaluate the anesthetic adequacy. In this manner our approach links the previous fundamental studies that are currently conducted by El ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1091 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Naschie [22] and by Weiss H. and Weiss V [23]. As the CZKF method evidences in detail, the variance of the EEG may be quantified, and is a function of its frequencies. It becomes possible to scale and to measure inter-individual differences – for level of cognition, IQ or anesthetic adequacy not by any absolute score, but by the inter-individual variance of the subjects. Weiss and Weiss [23], in particular, based on empirical data of different authors, showed that thinking can be understood, if we see thoughts as macroscopic ordered (quantum) states in the sense of statistical mechanics. Thinking seems only to be possible, if brain waves use the mathematical properties of the golden ratio and hence of fractal-Cantorian spacetime as discussed by El Naschie [22]. Therefore, a straightforward application of the method and measure here developed is to test the IQ of subjects and correlate the measures arising from CZKF with IQ, using power and variance in the entire range from 3 to about 30 Hz of the EEG. 5. An Analysis of State Anxiety 5.1 Introduction We will develop now a final application. We will study the state anxiety in humans. We will apply all the previous exposed methodologies. In order to delineate in detail such developed research, we retain that we will help the reading exposing this argument avoiding any possible intermixture with the previous ones, and thus separating this argument from the previous ones, using also references, tables and figures that relate a separate and independent numeration respect to the previous one, used to illustrate the general field of methodologies and applications. Let us start with a brief discussion on the use of non linear methodologies in psychology. Psychological data were usually collected in the past psychological studies to assess differences between individuals or groups which were considered to be stable over time (1,2). Instead, a further approach has gained relevance in the past decade, which is aimed to perform an intensive time sampling of psychological variables of individuals or groups at regular intervals, to study time oscillations of the collected data (1). In this way human behavior has been investigated to analyze, for instance, the impact of everyday experience on well-being (3) or the after-effects of negative events (4) or to examine the association between emotions and behavioral settings (5). These studies were often aimed to analyze the nature of rhythmical oscillations in mood and performance of human beings (6). Such an approach leads to progressive changes not only in the methods to sample psychological data but also in our way of thinking about many psychological variables, which may be considered as expression of mind entities unfolding over time (1). A reason to outline the importance of this approach is to acknowledge the role of the human interactions in governing the transitions which continuously take place in mind entities. It is becoming relevant the notion that our mind, our ideas and convictions are all formed as the results of interactive changes and all they follow possibly a quantum like behavior. Let us explain in detail what we mean by this statement (7,8). For certain questions, individuals have predefined opinions, thoughts, feelings or, still, behaviors. This kind of condition may be considered to be stable in time in the sense that an intensive time sampling of data, consisting as example to questions asked to an individual from an outsider observer or by himself at regular ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1092 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology time intervals, will simply record a predefined answer that never will be determined and actualized at the same time the question is posed .In this case, we have a stable dynamic pattern for individuals or groups. The intensive time sampling of data will only confirm an information on time dynamics that is stable in reporting a pattern in self-report or in performance measures with regard to behavior in time of the involved individuals. It has been evidenced (7, 8) that, under the profile of a statistical analysis, the cases as those just mentioned, in which individuals have a predefined opinion or thought that may not be changed in time at the same moment in which questions are actually posed, correspond to a kind of classical dynamics that, statistically speaking, may be analyzed in terms of classical statistical approaches since they are not context dependent (7,8). There are situations in which, instead, a person, who is being questioned by himself or by an outsider observer, has no predefined opinion or thought or feeling or behavior on the given question. The kind of opinion, as example, is formed (that is to say: it is actualized) only at the moment in which the question itself is posed and it is formed on the basis of the context in which the same question is posed. This is a case of a quantum like behavior for a cognitive entity. The core of the difference resides in the fact that in the case of quantum like behavior we are dealing with the actualization of a certain property that is dependent from the instant of time in which the question is posed and thus, in particular, it depends also from the context in which it is posed while, instead, in the classical case all properties are assumed to have a definite connotation before the question itself is posed and thus they are time and context independent. Processes of the first kind are said quantum like, and they follow a quantum like statistics (7, 8). The basic content of such quantum probability approach is the calculation of a probability of actualization of one among different potentialities as result of the individual inspection itself or of an outsider observation. New paradigms are thus emerging in studies regarding mind behavior: one is the concept of potentiality, linked to the concept of actualization. Still, we have the concept of dynamic pattern that is linked to the observation of changing in time as result of the interactive transitions (potentiality-actualization) which take place in human interactions. The case of quantum like behavior is one of the manifold situations in which an intensive time sampling of psychological data, may give important information on the dynamic patterns in self-report and performance measures. It is noteworthy that people have a defined ―sense of self‖ and accompanying memories of a very early age. It may be due to the fact that the ―attractor‖ of personality (as developed by the brain) has not established a defined enough probability of neuronal connections to establish such a distribution: if neuronal connections are essentially uniform in their shape, it is questionable if an attractor is defined. With repetitive learning inputs, the probability distributions become established (narrowed) and ―personality‖ emerges. Learning skills proceeds along similar lines: repetitive ―habits‖ further narrow the probability distributions so as to make a particular action more refined to the point of not requiring active effort. Both personality and learning, however, are dependent upon the genetics which establish the basic physiology of the neuronal machinery. Predictability regarding personalities and activity is by definition of the singular dynamics, a stochastic process: no matter how narrowed the probability distributions, there always remains a level of uncertainty. The performance of current neural networks is still too ―rigid‖ in comparison with even simplest biological systems. This rigidity follows from the fact that the behavior of a dynamical system is fully prescribed by initial conditions. The system never ―forgets‖ these conditions: it carries their ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1093 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology ―burden‖ all the time. In contrast to this, biological systems are much more flexible: they can forget (if necessary) the past, adapting their behavior to environmental changes. The thrust here is to discuss the substantially new type of dynamical system for modeling biological behavior introduced as non deterministic dynamics. The approach is motivated by an attempt to remove one of the most fundamental limitations of current models of artificial neural networks—their ―rigid‖ behavior compared to biological systems. As has been previously exposed in detail, the mathematical roots of the rigid behavior of dynamical systems are in the uniqueness of their solutions subject to prescribed initial conditions. Such an uniqueness was very important for modeling energy transformations in mechanical, physical, and chemical systems which have inspired progress in the theory of differential equations. This is why the first concern in the theory of differential equations as well as in dynamical system theory was for the existence of a unique solution provided by so-called Lipschitz conditions. On the contrary, for information processing in brain-style fashion, the uniqueness of solutions for underlying dynamical models becomes a heavy burden which locks up their performance into a singlechoice behavior. A new architecture for neural networks (which model the brain and its processes) is suggested which exploits a novel paradigm in nonlinear dynamics based upon the concept of non-Lipschitz singularities [7, 8]. Due to violations of the Lipschitz conditions at certain critical points, the neural network forgets its past as soon as it approaches these points; the solution at these points branches, and the behavior of the dynamical system becomes unpredictable. Since any vanishingly small input applied at critical points causes a finite response, such an unpredictable system can be controlled by a neurodynamical device which operates by noise and uniquely defines the system behavior by specifying the direction of the motions in the critical points. The super-sensitivity of critical points to external inputs appears to be an important tool for creating chains of coupled subsystems of different scales whose range is theoretically unlimited. Due to existence of the critical points, the neural network becomes a weakly coupled dynamical system: its neurons (or groups of neurons) are uncoupled (and therefore, can perform parallel tasks) within the periods between the critical points, while the coordination between the independent units (i.e., the collective part of the performance) is carried out at the critical points where the neural network is fully coupled. As a part of the architecture, weakly coupled neural networks acquire the ability to be activated not only by external inputs, but also by internal periodic rhythms. (Such a spontaneous performance resembles brain activity). It must be stressed, however, that behavior may be predicted in the sense of establishing a probability distribution of choices. Thus behavior is not determined, but ‗guessed‘ within the bounds of the probability distribution. In its most simple form, consider, for example, an equation without uniqueness: dx/dt = x 1/3 cos t. At the singular solution, x = 0 (which is unstable, for instance at t = 0), a small noise drives the motion to the regular solutions, x =  (2/3 sin  t)3/2 with equal probabilities. Indeed, any prescribed distribution can be implemented by using non-Lipschitz dynamics. It is important to emphasize, however, the fundamental difference between the probabilistic properties of these non-Lipschitz dynamics and those of traditional stochastic or differential equations: the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1094 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology randomness of stochastic differential equations is caused by random initial conditions, random force or random coefficients; in chaotic equations small (but finite) random changes of initial conditions are amplified by a mechanism of instability. But in both cases the differential operator itself remains deterministic. Thus, there develops a set of ―alternating,‖ ―deterministic‖ trajectories. We would now discuss the reason of a terminology that is delineating. As said, the analogy is with the physics. The state s(t) of a physical entity S at time t represents the reality of this physical entity at that time. In the case of classical physics the state is represented by a point in phase space while in quantum physics it is represented by a unit vector in Hilbert space. In classical terms the state s(t) of the physical entity S determines the values of all the observable quantities connected to S at time t. The state q(t) of a quantum entity is represented instead by a unit vector of Hilbert space, the so called normalized wave function (r,t). For a quantum entity in state (r,t) the values of the observable quantities are potential: this is to say that a quantum entity never has, as example, simultaneously a definite position and a definite momentum and this represents the intrinsic quantum indeterminism that affects reality at this level. We have the relevant concept of potentiality: a quantum entity has the potentiality to realize some definite value for some of its observable quantities. This happens only at the moment of the observation or of measurement and it is this mechanism that realizes a transition from a pure condition of potentiality to a pure condition of actualization. A definite value is not actually realized in the potential state (r,t). A definite values is really actualized only at the moment of the direct observation of some property of the given entity and through the same mechanism of the observation during the act of the measurement. The novel feature is in the transition potentiality  actualization that characterizes the mechanism of observation and measurement. We have to realize here a large digression in order to clear in detail this point that appears to us of fundamental importance. As we know all quantum mechanics is based on such binomial conceptualization of potentiality from one hand and actualization from the other hand. In particular, the actualization corresponds to the observation and measurement or, that is to say, to the moment in which we become conscious that some kind of measurement has happened (collapse of wave function) since we read its result by some device. Generally speaking, a system is in a superposition of possible states (superposition principle, potentiality) and such superposition principle is violated in a measurement. This led von Neumann to postulate that we have two fundamentally different types of time evolution for a quantum system. First, there is the casual Schrödinger equation evolution. Second, there is the noncasual change due to a measurement and this second type of evolution (passage from potentiality to actualization) seems incompatible with the Schrödinger form. This situation forced von Neumann to introduce what is usually called the von Neumann postulate of quantum measurement. This happened about 1932. Rather recently, one of us (EC), using two theorems in Clifford algebra, has been able to give a complete justification of von Neumann postulate. The result has appeared on International Journal of Theoretical Physics, and it is available on line [8]. Thus we have given proof of a thing that for eighty years remained a postulate, often discussed and largely questioned. This new result, at least under an algebraic profile, explains the wave function collapse and gives total justification of it, also giving to quantum mechanics an arrangement as self-consistent theory that in the past was often ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1095 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology questioned as missing in the theory and signing such missing as a probe of weakness of such theory. In conclusion, the passage potentiality – actualization now seems a more demonstrated transition to which we have to attribute the greatest importance if we do not aim to remain linked to a too limited vision of our reality. On the other hand, there is no matter to continue an infinite discussion on a possible link between quantum mechanics and cognition. We have unequivocal results that demonstrate in detail such point. It is universally accepted that J. von Neumann showed that projection operators represent logical statements. In brief, J. von Neumann showed that we may construct logic starting from quantum mechanics. According to the fundamental papers published by the great logician Yuri Orlov, and in the light of the results that, we repeat, one of us has recently obtained, it may be unequivocally shown that also the inverted passage is possible. Not only we may derive logic on the basis of quantum mechanics. We may derive quantum mechanics from logic. So, the ring is closed. The link between quantum mechanics and cognition is strongly established. The split that occurred between psychology and the physical sciences after the establishment of psychology as an independent discipline cannot continue to encourage a delay in acknowledging this thesis. We may be convinced that there are levels of our reality in which the fundamental features of logic and thus of cognition acquire the same importance as the features of what is being described. Here we no more can separate ―matter per se‖, in Orlov words, from the features of logic and cognition used to describe it. We lose the possibility of unconditionally defining the truth, as we explained previously, since the definition of truth, now depend on how we observe (and thus we have cognition) the physical reality . Obviously such relativism does not exist in classical mechanics while instead by quantum mechanics we have a Giano picture able to look simultaneously on the left and on the right, at cognitive as well as physical level. Let us return now to the central problem we have in discussion. Some mind entities follow quantum like behavior (7, 8). Let us restrict our example to the case of a cognitive entity. A psychological task asks to a participant a question that has a predefined value as answer for each individual. The task asks, as example, to the participant if he (she) has blue eyes. It is clear that the cognitive entity of the participant has a predefined opinion on this question and the measurement, corresponding to the act of posing the question to the subject, will furnish only the trivial recording of an output that is predefined also before the question is posed. There are cases in which the cognitive entity may be submitted to a question for which the person who is being questioned has no opinion ready. He has several potentialities and only one of such potentialities will be actualized at the moment the question is being asked. As example, let us admit that the posed question is the following: are these two geometrical figures equal? (an ambiguous figure). At the moment the question is being asked, the subject has no predefined opinion. He may have, as example, two potential states (possibilities) that are superimposed and they are the two possible answers: yes and no. The cognitive entity will actualize only one answer among the two possible ones at the moment the question is posed and such actualization will correspond to an act of consciousness of the subject. Through the posed question, the subject will be induced to a transition from to a condition of potentiality to that one of actualization. In a quantum like framework, such mechanism of transition from potentiality to actualization will be intrinsically stochastic and strongly dependent from the context in which the cognitive entity of the subject will be induced to answer. Potentiality states of mind entities are superposition of potentialities that are characterized at an ontological level and, as said, among the different ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1096 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology potentialities only one state will be actualized corresponding to an act of introspective activity (consciousness advent) of a subject. It is clear that in such cases an intensive time sampling procedure enables to collect data relating subsequent individual acts of introspection, of actualization, of conscious aware and this represents an interesting technique for analysis of mind dynamics. It is important to outline here that the approach of using an intensive time sampling of psychological data is relevant not only in the cases in which a quantum like behavior may be assumed but, generally speaking, in all the cases of experimentation in which there is the reasonable motivation to retain that it is the dynamic evolution in time of mind entity to cover an important role in the framework of the investigated phenomenology. It remains to evidence that, through an intensive time sampling of psychological data, we realize a discrete collection of results that usually we call a time series of data. They are actually used extensively in physiological studies of biological signals, and the importance is related to the fact that they contain a fingerprinting of the process under investigation. Consequently, the basic finality of this kind of studies is to analyze the nature of the observed fluctuations in time. Generally, the analysis of the data may enable to establish relevant questions as if time evolution follows a linear or a non linear dynamics, and in particular if it is regulated by deterministic, or chaotic deterministic or noise influenced patterns. In the present study we investigated the phenomenon of anxiety of state. The finality was to introduce new parameters for the interpretation and control of such psychological manifestation. 5.2 The Phenomenon of Anxiety Anxiety may represent a proper condition to investigate in detail potentiality of mind entities in analysis of time dynamic pattern. It is well known that fear is profoundly distinguished from anxiety. It is known from many models (9), that fear is a response to a present and actual danger while, generally speaking, anxiety is a response to a potential danger. According to our quantum like model of the previous section, we may say that the anxious individual, at fixed times, may give his conscious introspection and thus evaluating and actualizing a danger that is only potentially fixed. Therefore, fear is a response to a present - real danger, anxiety is instead the response to a potential danger. In various models (10) the risk assessment is seen as the central component of anxiety and it is realized in terms of approaching and scanning potentially dangerous situations. Fear and anxiety can each produce a physiological arousal response that involves activation of the adrenergic system in the CNS and in sympathetic branch of the autonomic nervous system (SNS) (11). Since such identical systems are involved in both such conditions, the phenomenological experience of arousal seems similar, and such similarity of arousal experiences contributes to the common tendency to retain fear and anxiety as either interchangeable manifestations. There are instead substantial differences. The central difference between fear and anxiety should reside in the kind of quantum like behavior that we established in the previous section. The individual in a state of fear perceives the threat that is immediate and real and, on this basis, he gives an active response that in some manner is just induced from the external stimulus. In other terms, the individual actualizes a response that, in some sense, is defined on the basis of the kind of real perceptive stimulus that is offered to him. In the case of anxiety, the individual does not perceive an immediate threat (there is not an external stimulus ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1097 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology that actualizes the response). He is focused on a potential threat for the immediate or future times and in many cases he inherites this condition on the basis of his personal history and psychological background (see, as example, the case of a subject with post traumatic stress disorder). In analogy with intrinsic quantum indetermination of physical reality, there is here a proper condition of quantum like uncertainty for mind entity: owing to the indeterministic nature of the anxiety-producing threat, the individual remains suspended into potential states, and usually he cannot determine whether to act or how to act. This is the clear indication of quantum like behavior. The anxiety-producing threat is only potential: the individual feels that there is something that may happen or that might not happen; he remains suspended in a superposition of such potential states. He continues to think about the threat (he remains in the superposition of potential states). He does not react to an attack or to a perception of being attacked, but he remains in the suspended possibility of being attacked. If such individual perceives himself to be really under an attack (actualization), then he will enter an actual fear state. One very interesting feature is that anxiety represents an emotional condition that is so general and so radical in human that it cannot be considered only a sign of pathology or a defined syndrome but a general mode of the human existence with extreme values that obviously enter in the domain of psychopathology. Therefore, the time analysis of its dynamics offers an excellent opportunity to analyze basic features of a time dynamics regarding in general mind entities of human existence. In addition, while the anxiety of trait may be considered as a rather stable condition of our personality, the anxiety of state is considered more linked to transient phases of our everyday emotional condition, and it may be evaluated by using proper test that were introduced by C. D. Spielberger starting with 1964 (12). It is important to outline that the test may be repeated at fixed time intervals so to have a final time series of collected data that are indicative of the changing in time of the phenomenology under study. The individual is asked to answer to twenty fixed questions that were elaborated (12) with the direct finality to quantify the value of the anxiety of state at the moment of the administered test. For each question, the individual has at his disposal four different modalities of answer with a calibrated score ranging from 1 to 4 according to the seriousness of the emotional condition. The value of state anxiety for each administered test to the individual, is usually evaluated by direct calculation of the achieved total score and, in case, a statistical analysis may be developed in order to obtain standard statistical indexes over a proper range of time. It is evident that this manner to proceed results to be very limited. We are certainly interested to the values of the test but mainly we must focus our attention on the manner in which variations and oscillations of test values are induced in time from mind entities. For this purpose, the introduction of new methodologies and parameters is really required in order to characterize the dynamic pattern of anxiety of state in individuals: such parameters should be useful also to elaborate diagnostic as well as therapeutic strategies. From the viewpoint of our quantum like model the results of the test must be conceived in the following manner: at fixed times, the individual, through each posed question, exerts an introspective activity on himself (an act of conscious awareness): by each introspective act the subject makes a transition from a superposition of four potential states (the four kinds of answer that are at his disposal) to the final actualization of only one among such four potentialities. None of the four potentialities is predefined previously the question is posed (superposition of potential states) and only one among the different potentialities is actualized only at the moment of the conscious introspection (transition potentialityISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1098 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology actualization). Obviously, there exists also here a limit in our experimentation. When the subject repeat his(her) test for the second time, he just knows what question will be posed to him and this situation could influence his answer. However, we will admit here that the subject, a control subject not affected from pathologies, will be able to answer to the posed questions without suffering a strong conditioning arising from the fact that he previously knows the posed questions. Our aim is to investigate the nature of such transitions, potentiality-actualization, in time. 5.3 Materials and Methods Six healthy subjects were examined: F. Dav., male, 30 years old, D.Pet., female, 25 years old, A.Mac., female, 55 years old, G.Den., female, 30 years old, A.Men., male, 57 years old, M. Den., female, 32 years old. Each subject was subjected to the test four times in one day and precisely at each time step of three hours starting with the waking up. The collection of data proceeded for about 30 days. Time series data were collected by the test given to each subject . The resulting time series data for the subject D.Pet. is reported in Fig.1 to give an example of the obtained experimental time dynamic pattern. 5.4 Results of Poincaré-plot Analysis of the Data In this section, we aim to introduce new indexes that in our opinion may help in the characterization of the investigated process. As usual, our examination of the data started with the elaboration of a statistical analysis for the six examined subjects. The results are reported in Tables 1-6 for each subject. Mainly, we calculated the mean, the standard deviation and the variance of the scores obtained in about 30 days. Of importance it must be considered the value of the variance since, as previously said, we were mainly interested to investigate the phenomenology of the variations, and thus of the oscillations and of the fluctuations of the test value during the time period of its administration. We added also some other statistical indexes as the Median, the Minimum-Maximum values, the Root Mean Squared, the Skewness and the Kurtosis to have a clear characterization of the correctness of our samples under a statistical profile. In fact, it may be verified by these indexes that all the subjects responded to the test with full adherence to the requirements of the correct statistical samples. A subject reached a mean value of 23.4 for the test, the other reached 30.3, the subsequent obtained 38.1, the other had 38.3 and, finally, the two remaining subjects had 47.2 and 53.4 respectively. It is important to outline here that the test furnishes usually four different scales for the evaluation of the score, the first with score value of 20 (very moderate level of anxiety of state), the second with value ranging from 21 to 40 (moderate level of anxiety of state), the third with score value ranging from 41 to 60 (high level of anxiety of state), and the fourth with score value ranging from 61 to 80 (very high level of anxiety of state). Therefore, four subjects resulted to have a moderate level of anxiety of state, and the remaining two subjects resulted instead to have an high level of anxiety of state. Note that the use of the mean value of the test in time and the subdivision of the test score in four intervals does not help for a correct diagnostic identification of the dynamic pattern of each subject in time. Looking at the values of the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1099 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Standard Deviations and of the Variances for such subjects, one catches sight of profound differences among subjects included instead in the same interval. As example, in the case of two subjects we have mean values of 38.1 and 38.3 that are very similar under the profile of the mean score but they exhibit profound differences under the profile of their variability in time since one has a Standard Deviation of 6.39 and a Variance of 40.86 while the other subjects has a Standard Deviation of 9.99, and a Variance of 99.89. Therefore, it derives that in no manner the mean value of score in the test for anxiety of state may be assumed to represent the correct diagnostic profile of the anxiety of state of a subject in time. From the previous section we know that such dynamic profile could be quantum like and as such marked from pure stochastic behaviors. Therefore we must be interested to a very deep analysis of such time variations, as oscillations and fluctuations of state anxiety in time and to this purpose the introduction of proper new indexes is primarily required. Before of all, in order to proceed along an accurate characterization of the time dynamic of state anxiety of subjects, we aim to introduce two new indexes. They are obtained reconstructing a kind of phase space with xi values in abscissa against xi+1 values in ordinate. On a fitted ellipse we identify two indexes, the first, that we call here SD1 in analogy with previous studies on heart rate variability, expresses the tendency to the variability of the score for each subject in the short time intervals, and the second, that we call SD2 for the same analogy, expresses instead the tendency to the variability in the score along a consistent time interval. The use of such both indexes, SD1 and SD2, gives us the manner to characterize and to examine the dynamic tendency of state anxiety for each subject along the time interval of the investigation, considering variations of this phenomenon in the brief interval of time as well as in the larger time interval. Poincaré-plots (13) are currently employed to investigate the complex dynamics of non linear processes as those given in Fig.1. A two-dimensional phase space may be used to visualize the information contained in a given time series. In a Cartesian co-ordinate system a point Pi is defined by the time interval Ti and  intervals subsequently following Ti, thus giving Pi(Ti,Ti+), being  a proper time delay that in studies of chaotic-deterministic time series may be estimated by using Autocorrelation Function and Mutual Information Function (14). In this our preliminary investigation a time delay =1 was selected by us. In this manner, the Poincaré-plot resulted to be a diagram in which each data of the given time series is plotted as a function of the previous one (=1), this plot gives a visual inspection of the given time series data by representing qualitatively with graphic means the kind of variations of such data fingerprinted during their collection. The realized plots may be analyzed also quantitatively. This quantitative method of analysis is based on the assumption of different temporal effects of changes on the subsequent time series data without a requirement for a stationary behavior of data itself. Analysis, generally, entails fitting an ellipse to the plot with its center coinciding with the center point of the markings. The line defined as axis 2 shows the slope of the longitudinal axis, whereas axis 1 defines the transverse slope that is perpendicular to axis 2. Usually, the Poincaréplot is first round 45 degree ring, clockwise. The standard deviation of the plot data is then computed around the axis 2 and passing through the data center. The first index, SD1, is so calculated. SD1 accounts for the variability of the data for short intervals of time. The standard deviation of long term data is quantified by turning the plot 45 degree ring, counterclockwise, and by computing this time for data points around axis 1 which passes through the center of the data. SD2 is calculated and it accounts for variability of data for long term time intervals. In conclusion, given the time series data, we may introduce two indexes, SD1 and SD2 respectively, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1100 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology that account for the variability of the analyzed data in short as well as long intervals of time. Applying this kind of analysis to our time series of data, we become able to estimate how is expected variability of state anxiety in subjects in short as well as in long intervals of times. The particular relevance of such two introduced indexes must be thus clear. It seems reasonable to conclude that subjects with low values of SD1 and SD2 will exhibit low levels of state anxiety while from a psychological and clinical viewpoint it will be carefully characterized the condition of subjects with high values of SD1 and SD2 or of SD1 and not SD2 or viceversa. A new phenomenology of state anxiety is so delineated, and it will be characterized by levels of state anxiety that will result to be discriminated and carefully characterized respect to the proper case of normality (low level of state anxiety). Statistically speaking, the plot will display the correlation possibly existing between consecutive data (scores of the test) in a graphical manner. Non linear dynamics considers the Poincaré-plot as a two dimensional reconstructed time series data phase space which is a projection of the reconstructed attractor describing, in our case, the dynamic of the mind entities responsible for state anxiety. Concluding: The time series data of state anxiety will give a Poincaré-plot that typically will appear as an elongated cloud of points oriented along the line of identity. The dispersion of points perpendicular to the line of identity will reflect the level of short term variability of the score for state anxiety (SD1) while the dispersion of points along the line of identity will indicate the level of long term variability of the score for state anxiety (SD2). The elliptic structure will mirror instead the basic periodicity of the data and thus, as an important indication, it will correspond to the possible periodicity of the scores during the administered test. We performed this analysis for the six subjects. The results of the Poincaré-plots are reported in Figures 2-7 while the quantitative results for SD1 and SD2, respectively, are given in Table 7 where they are compared with the mean values (s.d. and variances)of the scores of the test as they were previously calculated. The satisfactory predictive power of SD1 and SD2 is clearly evidenced. Let us comment briefly some results. The subject F. Dav reported a mean value of 23.4 with st. dev. of 2.7 and a variance of 8.30. SD1 resulted 2.11 while instead SD2 reached the value of 3.74. This means that in the short time interval such subject varied his score of only 2.11(thus ranging in mean from 21.29 to 25.51) and thus remaining any way in a moderate level of state anxiety. In the long intervals of time his score changed of 3.74 and thus ranging in mean from 20.00 to 27.14 that is still low and very similar to variability in short time intervals. In conclusion this subject had a rather stable condition of moderate state anxiety. The subject A. Men had a mean value of 30.3 with a st. dev. of 2.4 and a variance of 7.36. It resulted SD1=2.21 and SD2=3.13. The time dynamic of state anxiety of this subject seems to be very similar to that one of the previous subject with a rather stable tendency to remain in the condition of moderate level of anxiety in short as well in long intervals of times. Let us consider now the case of A. Mac. who had a mean value of 38.1 with a st. dev. of 6.39 and a variance of 40.86. From the statistical data we deduce that his mean value is only of 7.8 points greater than A. Men. (corresponding to about 21%) but standard deviations and variances result to be very different. Owing to the great value of the variance we expect for such subject a great ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1101 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology tendency to variability and it is of importance to establish if such tendency to time variability regards the short or the long time intervals or both. The use of Poincaré-plot gives this kind of information. In fact, SD1 resulted to be 5.46 while instead SD2 gave the value of 7.33. Comparing such results with those of F. Dav and of A. Men., we conclude that the subject A. Mac. has a tendency to a great variability both in short as well in long time intervals. In short times his score may vary in mean ranging from 32.64 to 43.56 (he may reach also the high level of state anxiety), and in the long interval of time, his score may vary in mean from 30.80 to 45.40 (he may reach the high level of state anxiety also greater than ones of short time terms). In conclusion, this subjects has dynamic features that result to be very different from the previous ones. As the first two subjects, A. Mac. starts in mean with a moderate level of state anxiety but in the short time intervals as well as in the long time intervals he has the tendency to reach also high levels of state anxiety. In conclusion, as seen, SD1 and SD2 compete in an evident manner to differentiate in detail the dynamic of state anxiety also for subjects that have very similar scores. Let us examine now a very different situation. The subject D. Pet had a mean value of score of 38.3 with a st. dev. of 9.00 and a variance of 99.89. Note that really the mean value (38.3) of this subject is substantially the same (38.1) of the previous subject A. Mac. Profound differences exist instead for st. dev. and variances indicating that, in spite of very similar results for the test, the two subjects exhibited very different dynamic patterns that are important to characterize. In fact, calculating SD1 and SD2, we obtain that SD1=5.82 while SD2 actually assumes the value of 12.96. In comparison with A. Mac, the subject D. Pet. has a very similar value of SD1 (5.82 vs 5.46) but a very large difference for SD2 (12.96 vs 7.33). In the long time intervals this subjects presents a variability that may be also of about 13 times higher, confining him in a condition of high state anxiety. Therefore his dynamic pattern is very different from that one of A. Mac although the scores of the test resulted substantially the same (38.3 vs 38.1). In addition the value of SD1 and SD2 for D. Pet. may be compared with the previous ones of F. Dav. that showed the most stable condition of moderate state anxiety . In this case, we may evidence a great suitability of SD1 (5.82 vs 2.11) and SD2 (12.96 vs 3.74) to actually characterize state anxiety of subjects and their variability in time. Looking at the results of Table 7 we may still comment the values of SD1 and SD2 that were obtained for the remaining subjects, G. Den and M. Den, observing that such indexes still continue to characterize in detail the time variability of state anxiety also for such subject. In conclusion, we suggest that, in addition to the scores that are collected by the test, two other indexes should be adopted in order to proper characterize time variability and thus time dynamics of state anxiety of individuals and they are SD1 and SD2 as they are obtained by analysis of the obtained time series data by using Poincaré-plots. 5.5 Results of Variogram and Fractal Analysis If SD1 and SD2 are two quantitative indexes that, as seen, are suitable to characterize the variability in short as well as in long time intervals for time series data regarding state anxiety, such indexes, of course, cannot give any detailed information on the time dynamics that ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1102 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology characterizes state anxiety. In order to reach this objective, a kind of non linear analysis must be still performed using some other elaborate techniques. Let us start considering the notion of fractal. This term was introduced (15) in 1983 by B.B. Mandelbrot. A fractal object is made of parts that are similar to the whole in some way, either the same except for scale or statistically the same. The chaos dynamic mechanism and the interaction of non linear processes may be an essential cause of uneven distributions of data which results in fractal structure. Self-similarity or statistical self-similarity may be investigated in given time series data with the finality to establish their fractal or multifractal behavior. A formal definition of a self-similar fractal in a two-dimensional x-y-space is that f(rx, ry ) is statistically similar to f(x, y) where r is a scaling factor. This may be quantified by applications of the fractal relation N = C r -D (5.1) where r is a characteristic linear dimension, D is the fractal dimension (real number >0), C is a constant of proportionality, the pre-factor parameter, N=N(>r) is the number of objects with characteristic linear dimension  r . As example, the number of boxes with dimension x1 and y1 required to cover a given object is N1 and the number of boxes with dimensions x2 = r x1, y2 = r y1 required to cover the object is N2. If the object is a self-similar fractal, we have that N2/N1=r-D In the same manner one may consider a self-similar fractal in a n-dimensional x1, x2,……….., xnspace with f(rx1,rx2,……,rxn) statistically similar to f(x1,x2,……….,xn). with r scaling factor. Many physiological processes posses scale similarity (scale-invariance) properties. Self-similarity or statistical self-similarity may be investigated in given time series data with the finality to establish their fractal or multi fractal behavior (16). In the present paper we will adopt the following simple procedure. Let us take now the notion of variogram previously exposed. Consider the importance to have introduced here an analysis by variogram of time series regarding state anxiety. While the previously introduced indexes SD1 and SD2 give a general indication on variability in time of state anxiety in short as well as in long time intervals, variogram enables to quantify such time variability at each lag time. In particular, a small value of the variogram will indicate that pairs of results of the given time series are similar or have a low variability at a particular time distance of separation. Of course, high values of the variogram will indicate instead that the values are very dissimilar or that we have high variability. The results of the variograms are reported in Figures 8-13 while the results of the fractal analysis are reported in Table 8. The analysis of the variograms reveals some important features. The subjects F. Dav and A. Men gave the most modest values of variograms ranging from 0 to 8.34 at least. They had a low ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1103 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology variability in time. This result is in accord with the mean value of the test that in fact gave the lowest values for such two subjects. Also the statistical values of st. dev. and of variance resulted very contained. Corresponding such subjects gave also the lowest values for SD1 and SD2 respectively. Note also that the variogram showed the tendency to decrease progressively (decreasing variability) after 20 lags (about 5 days) and to annul itself in about 80-90 lags corresponding to about 500 hours. This behavior reveals the tendency of state anxiety in such two subjects to vary with some periodicity concluding its cycle in about twenty days. Of course the tendency of the variogram to a progressive decrease (progressively decreasing variability) resulted mixed to time lag intervals with variogram showing increased variability as example, at 30, 50, 70 time lags corresponding to 180, 300, and 420 hours. Soon after, the subject A. Mac showed a more marked variability with a variogram ranging from 0 to 43.51. It is important to outline that also in this case we have an excellent agreement with the mean value of the test, the statistical indexes and the values of SD1 and SD2 respectively. Also in this case the variogram showed the tendency to decrease progressively its variability and to annul itself in about 80 lags. Again it followed an initial increase until 20 lags and still we had mixed time lag intervals of increasing variability at about 30, 50, 70 time lags. The same important results are obtained by inspection of the variogram regarding the subject G. Den. In this case the score of the test was of 53.4 in mean with a st. dev. of 8.8 and variance of 82.67. Correspondingly, the variogram also increased its maximum value ranging this time from 0 to 84.95. Also Sd1 and SD2 increased their values. The behavior of the variogram remained the same as in the previous cases, differing only for the assumed values. In particular, it increased until a time lag of about 20 lags and thus it decreased progressively and annulled itself in about 80-90 lags with mixed peaks at about 30, 50, 70 lags. In substance, they were the values of the variogram to differentiate the behavior of this subject respect to the other subjects while apparently the time dynamics remained unvaried for all the examined subjects. The same conclusions may be reached examining the case of the subject M. Den. This time the mean value of the test reached 47.2 with a st. dev. of 10.3 and a variance of 119.77. Respect to the subject G. Den, the score of the test resulted in mean lightly less (47.2 vs 53.4) but the st. dev. (10.3 vs 8.8) and the variances resulted greater (119.77 vs 82.67). The corresponding variogram assumed still an higher value ranging this time from 0 to 130.9. In correspondence also SD1 and SD2 resulted strongly increased and, in detail, SD1 resulted to be 4.72 and SD2 assumed the value of 10.3. The time lag behavior resulted the same as in the previous cases with the exception, obviously, of the assumed values. Also this time it increased until about 20 lags and thus it started to decrease annulling itself about 80-90 lags. Peaks were found again about 30, 50, 70 lags. The subject D. Pet showed instead some important differences. He had a mean score of the test of 38.3 (very similar to the score 38.1 of the subject A. Mac), but he had a st.dev. of 9.00 and a variance of 99.89, an high value in the investigated group. In correspondence SD1 resulted to be 58.2 but SD2 resulted to be 12.96, the highest value in the group of subjects. In conclusion, in spite of a moderate value of his score (38.3 mean value), this subject showed the highest variability in time dynamics of his state anxiety. In correspondence, the variogram resulted ranging from 0 to 100 and the time lag dynamics showed some modifications respect to the case of the other subjects. As in the previous cases, it increased until 20 lags and than it started to ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1104 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology decrease but annulling itself, this time about 110-120 lags. Still, very marked peaks this time appeared at about 20, 40, 60, 80-90 lags. In brief, we had some modifications in time dynamics but especially in the time variability of the dynamics of this subject. The explanation may be found analyzing the results of fractal analysis that are given in Table 8. Before of all, we have to outline that our analysis indicates for the first time that state anxiety responds to a fractal structure. We have a kind of multiplicative process possibly supported by additive noise. The Fractal Measure more than the Generalized Fractal Dimension reveals that we had moderate values of such parameter in correspondence of low values for mean score of the test, of st.dev., of variance, of SD1 and SD2 while instead we had progressively increasing values of Fractal Measure for increasing values of the mean value of score, of st.dev., of variance and of SD1 and SD2 in the case of the other subjects. In spite of a rather stable value for Generalized Fractal Dimension, we had value for Fractal Measure that progressively range from 13.2 to 305.00 with a net differentiation and thus a discriminating ability. 5.6 Linear Analysis in Frequency Domain In order to deepen the results that we obtained about the recurrent components that we identified by variogram analysis, we performed a further preliminary analysis calculating Fourier spectrum of the time series data of the six examined subjects. We must remember here that the limit of this kind of analysis is that it is a linear method in the framework of a process that instead is intrinsically non linear. However, we arrived to obtain some preliminary interesting information. In frequency domain we calculated an AR spectrum by using an AR model at order 16. We evidence for the first time that time behavior of state anxiety exhibits some harmonic components peaked at some specific frequencies that we identified in all the examined subjects. The basic features of such spectra are summarized in Figures 14-19 and in Table 9. We identified four bands of interest. The first about 0.1 Hz, the second about 0.2 Hz, the third in the region 0.30.4 Hz, the fourth about 0.5 Hz. Note that in ordinate we have always the test score as reference. The actual value is obtained by square root of power spectrum and multiplying by 100. As we know, we sampled the time series of subjects at time steps of about three hours. The frequency value was of 9.25x10-5 Hz. The spectra are given, in accordance with the Nyquist theorem, at 0.5 of such value. By such analysis it is seen that four peaks are always present in all the examined spectra. All they are given at the following times. One period of time is about 30 hours, the other is given about 15 hours, the third about 7.5-10 hours and, finally, the last about 6 hours. We find for the first time that state anxiety runs again quite periodically with times of 30,15,7.5-10, 6.0 hours. This is a very important result also for diagnostic and therapeutic reasons. Conclusions We started admitting a quantum like model for behavior of mind entities in state anxiety of human subjects. Our aim was to investigate time dynamic variability of data preparing several experimental time series that were obtained by using the well known test of D. Spielberger as it was arranged starting with 1964. We obtained that the dynamic of this process follows a fractal ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1105 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology regime possibly a quantum fractal behavior (18). In order to proceed with a quantification of the basic features of the time series under investigation, in addition to fractal analysis, we introduced several parameters, and, in detail, the Poincaré-plots with linked the indexes SD1 and SD2, quantifying time variability of the data along short as well as long times, and an analysis of time series data by a variograms. We found that SD1 and SD2 are very satisfactory indexes that may be used to characterize in detail time variability of state anxiety in human subjects. Also analysis by variograms confirmed its predictive attitude. It resulted able to delineate time variability of state anxiety at each time step and to differentiate among the different conditions of variability of human subjects. In particular, the use of variogram analysis enabled us also to identify an important feature of dynamics of the engaged mind entities. We found that the variograms of the different six subjects exhibit some constant recurrences in lags and thus in time: the variograms assumed always the same increasing and decreasing behavior at about the same times with pronounced peaks of variability still at the same recurrent times and finally such variograms annulling themselves also at recurrent times. This result suggests that the engaged mind entities behave in time following a proper inner function. In fact, the variograms of different subjects presented the same kinds of recurrences in time for all the subjects, also submitted to different environmental conditions. In conclusion, the state anxiety seems to represent an emotional human condition that is so general and so radical in human to express a common mode of human existence in time, regulated in the inner of mind entities by the same recurrent, deterministic like, function. In particular it was estimated by us that such recurrent mind function seems to repeat itself with periodicity like of about twenty days and giving again basic features of self-similarity. This recurrent function results instead to be differentiated in subjects, from subject to subject, only for the different values that it assumes at the same prefixed times. In conclusion, the state anxiety shows a rather constant tendency to be recurrent in time with an inner deterministic periodic like mechanism. Harmonic components were also found when we submitted time series data to frequency domain analysis by FFT. Finally, there are some other important questions that we examined in the present paper. We attributed a great importance to the analysis of the time variability of the data of time series that were investigated.. The different scores that were obtained in mean for the test of the six subjects, linked to the different values of st.dev. and variances, SD1 and SD2, and compared with the results of fractal analysis, indicated that the increasing mean values of the score of the test, of st. dev., of variance and of SD1 and SD2 correspond to an increasing time variability of the data in a recurrent functional framework that of course remained instead rather constant for all the six subjects not in the assumed values but in the temporal behavior. As general representation of the process, it seems thus emerging a framework in which we have a basic recurrent, deterministic like, process whose time behavior remains rather similar for all the six subjects but it is, instead, differentiated from subjects to subject owing to the variations and variability in the values that in time such basic function assumes in correspondence of the different states of anxiety characterizing the different subjects. This seems to represent an interesting result that we would comment in more detail. As previously we said, state anxiety represents an emotional condition that is so general and so radical in human that it cannot be considered only a sign of pathology or a defined syndrome but a general mode of the human existence. In our opinion, it represents consequently a proper condition to investigate on a general plane some features of mind entities in analysis of their time ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1106 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology dynamic pattern. In state anxiety, anxiety is activated uniquely in the conditions in which the subject evaluates his living situations as a threat and consequently he activates a sequence of behaviors as generally they are induced from anxiety. We have suggested a quantum like model for this process assuming a superposition of potential states in mind entities before the subject actives introspection. In detail our model runs as it follows. 1- State anxiety rises on the basis of inner motivations of the subject. This is to say that an inner stimulus as thoughts, feelings, biological needs,…is configured in mind entities as a superposition of potentialities. To give an example, remaining on the general plane let us examine the kind of emotional response that a subject could give to an event. In the case of a quantum like superposition of potentialities , we will have the following indicative expression  = c1frustrated > + c2anxious > + c3excited > + c4angry > + ……… (5.2) where  will represent the whole potential state of the mind entity of the subject for the emotion response . Each … > will represent each potential state of the emotion response dynamics and the complex numbers ci ( i = 1,2,…..) will be probability amplitudes so that  ci 2 will represent the probability that the potential state i will be actually recognized (actualized) at cognitive level when the subject will actualize his response thinking about his situation. 2- At the level of state anxiety, the initial stimulus will be inner (thoughts, feeling, ….. ) and, still again, we will have a superposition of potentialities as response. As example, with regard to the possibility for the subject to feel excitement as consequence of such inner stimulus, we will have  = c1 very moderate excitement >+c2 moderate excitement >+ c3 quite high excitement >+c4 very high excitement > (5.3) This is the superposition of potentialities at the level of mind entities. 3-The following step is that the subject will perform a cognitive evaluation. He will perform an introspective activity, an act of consciousness, and by this act, he will give actualization to only one among the various potentialities before mentioned in the (5.2 or 5.3). He will perform a transition potentiality  actualization giving to himself to be in the actual state 1 or 2 or 3 or 4. The first actualization will be performed with probability c12, the second with probability c22 , the third with probability c3 2 and the fourth with probability c42 . One actualization among the different possibilities will give also a score as result of the answer given from the subject submitted to the various questions posed by the test. The same mechanism will happen for the other posed questions of the test. Note that the particular importance of the (5.2 or 5.3) resides in the term superposition that we have employed for it. The potential states (5.2 or 5.3) represents the simultaneous presence of the four potentialities in mind entities of the subject. Consequently, the deriving model is that one of an intrinsic indetermination for mind entity at this stage. Such intrinsic and ontological indetermination is released only at the moment of the individual cognitive evaluation when he actualizes one and only one of the possibilities at his disposal and cancels the previous ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1107 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology indetermination. 4- As consequence of the actualization during the cognitive evaluation, the subject will experience a number of subjective feelings, of apprehensions, of anxious expectations also with activation (arousal) of his nervous system, and with the final evidence of some subjective behaviors. 5-Some control and /or defence mechanisms will interfere with this dynamic. They will have the finality to give adaptability to the subject and reduction of anxiety. The time series data that we collected for the six subjects reflect in some manner all this time dynamics, and we must expect that, in correspondence to the different mean values that were obtained as result of the test, the different subjects characterized the different levels of indetermination that, as previously seen, represent the crucial point of the whole process generating state anxiety. Let us give still some examples in order to be clear. For a subject with a very moderate or moderate mean value of the test of state anxiety we should have that the values of probabilities c12 and c22 of the (5.2 or 5.3) , just corresponding to a moderate anxiety, will be very high while there will be present very low values of probabilities of c3 2 and c42, corresponding instead to high anxiety. We will have approximately that c12 +c22 1 and c32  0 and c42  0 (5.4) This will be true for all the questions posed to the subject during the test. A subject having a very moderate or a moderate anxiety will be suspended really between two potential states (1) and (2) instead of (1), (2), (3), (4), being c32  0 and c42  0 and thus he will have a more moderate indetermination respect to the general case. The subjects with an high mean value of the score and an high variability in time, will have c12 +c22 + c32 + c42  1 with c32 + c42 >c12 +c22 (5.5) with all the four potential states having the concrete possibility of being actualized and thus such subjects will show greater indetermination and greater variability of data respect to the previous case. We may say that in the first case we have a lower indetermination in the potential states respect to the second one. This is to say that the subjects having higher mean score should exhibit more elevate indetermination respect to the case of subjects with less mean score. Obviously, in the case of more elevate values for scores and thus of indetermination, we expect that more hardly control mechanisms acted to reduce state anxiety or to induce adaptability in the investigated subjects, and such systematic action of mind and biological control induced high variability in the measured data. This is the reason because we found so marked differences in st. dev., in variances, in SD1 and SD2, and in variograms in the different examined subjects. The found time ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1108 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology variability of data was also direct expressions of the acting mechanism of mental and biological control and defence, and this was, in conclusion, the reason because, from its starting, we attributed so much attention to our analysis of time variability of data. They are indications of the great indetermination that is at the basis of this process as well as of the basic mechanisms of control that consequently enter in action. They, of course, represent the central core of the mechanisms to be understood in analysis of state anxiety. It is this reason because the quantitative indexes, that we introduced, seem to be of relevant importance. They are just able to characterize and to quantify indeterminism and acting control mechanisms in the dynamics of state anxiety of subjects. References [1] Zak M., The problem of irreversibility in newtonian dynamics. International Journal of Theoretical Physics 1992; 31 (2): 333-342. Zak M., Non-Lipschitzian dynamics for neural net modelling. Appl. Math. Lett. 1989; 2 (1): 69-74. Zak M., Non-Lipschitz approach to quantum mechanics. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 1998; 9 (7): 1183-1198. Zbilut J.P., Hubler A, Webber Jr. CL., Physiological singularities modeled by nondeterministic equations of motion and the effect of noise. In Milonas, M (Ed) Fluctuations and Order: The New Synthesis. New York: Springer Verlag. 1996: 397-417. Zbilut J.P., Zak M, Webber Jr. CL., Nondeterministic chaos in physiological systems. Chaos, Solutions, and Fractals 1995; 5: 1509-1516. Zbilut J.P., Zak M, Webber, Jr. CL., Nondeterministic chaos approach to neural intelligence. Intelligent Engineering Systems Through Artificial Neural Networks. Vol. 4. New York: ASME Press, 1994: 819-824. [2] Conte E., Federici A., Zbilut J.P., On a simple case of possible non-deterministic chaotic behaviour in compartment theory of biological observables. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2004; 22 (2): 277-284 Conte E., Pierri GP., Federici A., Mendolicchio L., Zbilut J.P., A model of biological neuron with terminal chaos and quantum-like features. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2006; 30 (4): 774-780 Conte E., Vena A., Federici A., Giuliani R., Zbilut J.P., A brief note on possible detection of physiological singularities in respiratory dynamics by recurrence quantification analysis of lung sounds. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2004; 21 (4): 869-877. Vena A., Conte E., Perchiazzi G., Federici A., Giuliani R., Zbilut J.P., Detection of physiological singularities in respiratory dynamics analyzed by recurrence quantification analysis of tracheal sounds. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2004; 22 (4): 869-881. [3] Webber Jr. CL., Zbilut J.P., RQA of nonlinear dynamical systems. www.nsf.gov/sbe/bcs/pac/nmbs/chap2.pdf [4] Takens F., Detecting strange attractors in turbulence. Lectures notes in mathematics 1981; 898, Takens F., Dynamical systems and turbulence, Warwick, Berlin, Springer-Verlag,1980: 336-381. For an excellent exposition of concepts of phase space and, in general, of methodologies and conceptual foundations in fractal and chaos theory, see the book: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1109 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Bassingthwaighte J.B, Liebovitch L., West B. J., Fractal Physiology. published by the American Physiological Society, New York, Oxford, 1994. [5] Fraser AM., Swinney HL., Independent coordinates for strange attractors from mutual information. Phys. Rev. 1986; A 33: 1134-1140. [6] Kennel MB., Brown R., Abarbanel HDI., Determining embedding dimension for phase space reconstruction using a geometrical construction, Pys. Rev. A 1992; 45: 3403-3411. [7] Grassberger P., Procaccia I., Measuring the strangeness of strange attractors. Physica D 1983; 9: 189-208. [8] Eckman J.P., Ruelle D., Ergodic theory of chaos and strange attractors. Rev. Mod. Phys. 1986; 57: 617-656. [9] Holden A.V., Chaos, Manchenster University Press, Manchester, 1986. Holzfuss J., Mayer–Kress G., Dimensions and entropies in Chaotic systems, quantification of complex behaviour. Spriger Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1986. Pesin Y.B., Characteristic Lyapunov Exponents and Smooth Ergodic Theory. Russian Math. Surveys 1977, 32 (4): 55-114. [10] Christiansen F., Rugh H.H., Computing Lyapunov spectra with continuous Gram-Schmidt orthonormalization. Nonlinearity 1997; 10: 1063–1072. Habib S. and Ryne R.D., Symplectic Calculation of Lyapunov Exponents. Physical Review Letters 1995; 74: 70–73. Rangarajan G., Habib S, Ryne R.D., Lyapunov Exponents without Rescaling and Reorthogonalization. Physical Review Letters 1998; 80: 3747–3750. Zeng X., Eykholt R., Pielke R.A., Estimating the Lyapunov-exponent spectrum from short time series of low precision. Physical Review Letters 1991; 66: 3229. Aurell E., Moffetta G., Frisanti A., Paladin G., Vulpiani A, Predictability in the large: an extension of the concept of Lyapunov exponent. J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 1997; 30: 1–26. [11] Mandelbrot B.B., Van Ness J.W., Fractional Brownian motions, fractional noises and applications, SIAM Rev 1968; 10: 422-436. Mandelbrot B.B, The fractal geometry of Nature. Freeman, San Francisco, 1982. [12] Eckmann J.P., Kamphorst S.O., Ruelle D., Recurrence Plots of dynamical systems. Europhysics Letters 1987; 4: 973-977. [13] Webber C.L., Zbilut J.P., Dynamical assessment of physiological systems and states using recurrence plot strategies. Journ. of Applied Physiology 1994; 76: 965-973. [14] Marwan N., Encounters with neighbors: current developments of concepts based on recurrence plots and their applications, doctoral dissertation. Institute of Physics, University of Postdam, 2003. Marwan N., Thiel M., Nowaczyk N.R., Cross recurrence plot based synchronization of time series. Nonlinear processes in geophysics 2002; 9: 325-331. [15] Conte E., Federici A., Minervini M., Papagni A., Zbilut J.P, Measures of coupling strength and synchronization in non linear interaction of heart rate and systolic blood pressure in the cardiovascular control system. Chaos and Complexity Letters 2006; 2 (1): 1-22. [16] Conte E., Federici A., Pierri GP, Mendolicchio L., Zbilut J.P., A Brief Note on Recurrence Quantification Analysis of Bipolar Disorder Performed by Using a van der Pol Oscillator. Chaos and Complexity Letters 2007; 3 (1): 25-44. Orsucci F., Nonlinear dynamics in language and psychobiological interactions. in 'Orsucci, F. (ed) The Complex Matters of the Mind, World Scientific, Singapore and London 1998. Orsucci F., Walters K., Giuliani A., Webber Jr CL., Zbilut J.P., Orthographic Structuring of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1110 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Human Speech and Texts: Linguistic Application of Recurrence Quantification Analysis, International Journal of Chaos Theory and Applications 1999; 4 (2): 80−88. Orsucci F., Changing Mind: transitions in natural and artificial environments. World Scientific, Singapore and London 2002. Orsucci F., Giuliani A, Webber CL. Jr, Zbilut J.P., Fonagy P., Mazza M., Combinatorics and synchronization in natural semiotics, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics 2006; 361: 665 [17] Mastrolonardo M., Conte E., Zbilut J.P., A fractal analysis of skin pigmented lesions using the novel tool of the variogram technique. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2006; 28 (5): 11191135. Conte E., Pierri GP., Federici A., Mendolicchio L., Zbilut J.P., The Fractal Variogram Analysis as General Tool to Measure Normal and Altered Metabolism States and the Genetic Instability: An Application to the Case of the Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma. Chaos and Complexity Letters 2008; 3 (3): 121-135. Conte E., Federici A., Zbilut J.P., A new method based on fractal variance function for analysis and quantification of sympathetic and vagal activity in variability of R–R time series in ECG signals. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2008; 41 (2009) 1416–1426 Conte E., Khrennikov A., Federici A., Zbilut J.P., Fractal Fluctuations and Quantum-Like Chaos in the Brain by Analysis of Variability of Brain Waves: A New Method Based on a Fractal Variance Function and Random Matrix Theory. arXiv:0711.0937, Conte E., Khrennikov A., Federici A., Zbilut J.P., Fractal Fluctuations and Quantum-Like Chaos in the Brain by Analysis of Variability of Brain Waves: A New Method Based on a Fractal Variance Function and Random Matrix Theory: a link with El Naschie fractal Cantorian space time and H. Weiss and V. Weiss golden ratio in brain.. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals. 41 (2009) 2790–2800 [18] Hurst H.E., Black R., Sinaika Y.M., Long term storage in reservoirs: an experimental study. Costable, London, 1965. [19] Wei S. and Pengda Z., Multidimensional Self-Affine Distribution with Application in Geochemistry. Mathematical Geosciences 2002; 34 (2): 121-131. [20] http://physionet.org/physiobank/database/mvtdb/RRdata1/ http://www.physionet.org/physiobank/database/fantasia/subset/ [21] Giuliani A., Piccirillo G., Marigliano V., Colosimo A, A nonlinear explanation of aginginduced changes in heartbeat dynamics. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 1998; 275: H1455H1461. [22] El Nashie M.S., E–finite theory – some recent results and new interpretations. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2006; 29: 845-853. [23] Weiss H. and Weiss V., The golden mean as clock cycle of brain waves. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2003; 18: 643-652. See also Datta D.P. and Raut S., The arrow of time and the scale free analysis. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 2006; 28: 581-589. [24] Koelsch S., Remppis A., Sammler D., Jentschke S., Mietchen D., Fritz T., Bonnemeier H. Walter A. Siebel5 W. A cardiac signature of emotionality, European Journal of Neuroscience, 2007, 26: 3328–3338, [25] Thayer J.F., Smith M., Rossy L.A., Sollers J., Friedman B.H. Heart Period Variability and Depressive Symptoms: Gender Differences, Biol. Psychiatry, 1998, 44: 304–306 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1111 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology References for analysis of state anxiety [1] Larsen R. J., 1989, A process approach to personality psychology, D.M. Buss and N. Cantor Eds, Personality and Psychology, Recent Trends and Emerging Directions, Springer Verlag, New York. [2] Totterdell P., Briner R.B., Parkinson B., Reynolds S., Fingerprinting Time Series: Dynamic patterns in self-report and performance measures uncovered by a graphical non linear method, British Journal of Psychology, 1996, 87: 43-60 [3] Tennen H., Suls J., Affleck G., Personality and daily experience: The promise and the challenge, Journal of Personality, 1991: 59: 313-338 [4] DeLongis A., Folkman S., Lazarus R.S., The impact of daily stress on health and mood: psychological and social resources as mediators, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1988, 54: 486-495 [5] Brandstatter H., 1991, Emotions in every day life situations.Time sampling of subjective experience, Subjective well being, Oxford, Pergamon Press. [6] Larsen R. J, Kasimatis M., Day to day physical symptoms:individual differences in the occurrence, duration and emotional concomitans of minor daily illness, Journal of Personality, 1991, 59: 387-424 [7] Zak M., Non-Lipschitz approach to quantum mechanics, Chaos Solitons and Fractals, 1998, 9 (7): 1183-1198 and references therein. Zbilut J.P., 1997, From Instability to Intelligence: Complexity and Predictability in nonlinear Dynamics, Lecture Notes in Physics, New Series m 49, Springer Verlag. Zbilut J.P., 2004, Unstable singularities and Randomness: Their importance in the complexity of physical, biological and social sciences, Elsevier Science. Gabora L. Aerts D. Creative Thought as a non Darvinian evolutionary process, Journal of Creative Behavior (in press), and references therein. Aerts D, Broekaert J., Gabora L., A case for applying an abstracted quantum formalism to cognition, M.H. Bihard and R.Campbell Eds, Mind in interaction, Amsterdam: John Benjamin Archive (in press), quant-ph/0404068, and references therein. Conte E., Pierri G.P., Federici A., Mendolicchio L., Zbilut J.P., On a model of biological neuron with terminal chaos and quantum like features, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, Chaos Solitons and Fractals, 2006, 30: 774-780. [8] Conte E., Todarello O., Federici A., Vitiello F., Lopane M., Khrennikov A, Zbilut J.P., Found Experimental Evidence of Quantum Like Behavior of Cognitive Entities. An abstract quantum mechanical formalism to describe cognitive entity and its dynamics, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, Chaos Solitons Fractals 2006, 31: 1076-1088. Conte E., Todarello O., Federici A., Vitiello F., Lopane M., Khrennikov, 2003, A preliminar evidence of quantum like behavior in measurements of mental states, Quantum Theory: Reconsideration of Foundations, Ed. A.Yu. Khrennikov, Ser. Math. Modeling in Phys. Eng. and Cognitive Sciences, vol.3, Vaxjo, Univ. Press., and references therein; Conte E,.Khrennikov A., Todarello O., Federici A., Mendolicchio L., Zbilut J.P , Mental States Follow Quantum Mechanics During Perception and Cognition of Ambiguous Figures, Open Systems and Information Dynamics 2009, 16 (1): 1-17. Conte E., Khrennikov A., Todarello O., Federici A., Zbilut J.P, On the Existence of Quantum Wave Function and Quantum Interference Effects in Mental States An Experimental Confirmation during Perception and cognition in humans, Neuroquantology, June 2009, 7 (2): 204-212 and references therein. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1112 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Conte E. Exploration of Biological function by quantum mechanics, Proceedings 10th International Congress on Cybernetics, 1983;16-23, Namur, Belgique. Conte E. Testing Quantum Consciousness NeuroQuantology 2008; 6 (2): 126-139 Elio Conte, A Proof That Quantum Interference Arises in a Clifford Algebraic Formulation of Quantum Mechanics , available on line Philpapers Elio Conte, On Some Cognitive Features of Clifford Algebraic Quantum Mechanics and the Origin of Indeterminism in This Theory: A Derivation of Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle by Using the Clifford Algebra, available on line PhilPapers Elio Conte (2009). Decision Making : A Quantum Mechanical Analysis Based On Time Evolution of Quantum Wave Function and of Quantum Probabilities During Perception and Cognition of Human Subjects, available on line Philpapers. Conte E., A reformulation of von Neumann‘s postulates on quantum measurement by using two theorems in Clifford algebra, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, DOI 10.1007/s10773-009-0239-z , available on line Khrennikov A. Yu., Linear Representation of probabilistic transformations induced by context transitions, J, Phys. A. Math.and Gen., 2001, 34: 9965-9981; Khrennikov A. Yu, Representation of the Kolmogorov model having all distinguishing features of quantum probabilistic model, Phys. Lett. A., 2003, 316: 279-296. [9] Catherall Don R., How Fear differs from anxiety, Traumatology, 2003, 9 (2): 76-92. [10]Lang P.J. Davis A., Fear and Anxiety: animal models and human cognitive psycophysiology, Journal of affective disorders, 2000, 61 (3): 137-159. [11]Sullivan G.M., Copland J.D., Kent J.M., Gorman J.M., The adrenergic system in pathological anxiety: a focus on panic with relevance to generalized anxiety and phobias, Biological Psychiatry, 1999, 46 (9): 1205-1218 [12]Spielberger C.D. 1991, S.T.A.I., Ansia di Stato e di Tratto, Wyeth, Organizzazioni Speciali, Firenze. [13] Brenman M., Palaniswami M., Kamen P., (2001), Do existing measures of Poincaré plot geometry reflect non linear features of HRV?, IEE transactions on biomedical Eng., and references therein [14] Sprott J.C., 2003, Chaos and Time series analysis, Oxford University Press. [15] Mandelbrot B.B., 1975, Les objects fractals: forme, hasard et dimension, Paris Flammarion [16]Merlini D., Losa G., 2005, Fractals in Biology and Medicine, Springer Verlag. [17]Wei S., Pengda Z., Multidimensional self- affine distributions with application in geochemistry, Math. Geol., 2002, 34 (2):109-123, and references therein. [18] see as example: Gomez J.M.G., Relano A., Retamosa J., Failero E., Salasnich L., Vranicar M., Robnik M., 1/f Noise in Spectral Fluctuations of quantum systems, Physical Review Letters, 2005, 94: 84101-84104; Relano A., Gomez J.M.G., Molina R.A., Retanosa J., Quantum Chaos and 1/f noise, Phys. Review Letters, 2002, 89: 24102-24105. [19] Webber C.L. Jr, Zbilut J.P. Dynamical assessment of physiological systems and states using recurrence plot strategies, J. Appl. Physiol. 1994, 76: 965-973. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1113 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Table 1 Embedding Analysis Subjects Mutual False Nearest Autocorrelation Information Neighbors Function (Au) (MI) (FNN) Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 O1 O2 O3 O5 O6 Vt3-13 Vt2-67 Vt1-26 Vt1-15 Vt1-03 Vf2-30 Vf2-71 Vf18013 Vf1-217 Vf1-115 10 103 32 17 19 12 385 110 16 23 312 86 32 357 139 21 1 3 1 3 2 2 1 2 2 3 3 2 4 3 2 2 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 7 2 6 8 5 90 1 358 4 2 3 4 4 2 Table 2 Largest Lyapunov Exponent E Statistical analysis (t-Test) Y1 Y2 Y3 0.625 ± 0.054 0.635 ± 0.052 0.645 ± 0.055 Yi vs Oi Y4 Y5 O1 O2 O3 0.625 ± 0.049 0.521 ± 0.053 0.562 ± 0.047 0.440 ± .044 0.523 ± 0.052 Subjects ISSN: 2153-8212 P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Oi vs Vti P value P value summary Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. 0.0066 ** Yes t=3.634 df=8 0.0281 * www.JCER.com 1114 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology O5 O6 Vt3-13 Vt2-67 Vt1-26 0.439 ± 0.055 0.490 ± .066 0.373 ± 0.063 0.432 ± 0.085 0.430 ± 0.094 Vt1-15 Vt1-03 Vf2-30 Vf2-71 Vf18013 0.150 ± 0.058 0.294 ± 0.113 0.498 ± 0.122 0.605 ± 0.083 Vf1-217 Vf1-115 0.668 ± 0.066 0.168 ± 0.098 0.648 ± 0.074 Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Yi vs Vti P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Yi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Yes t=2.675 df=8 0.787 ns No t=0.2794 df=8 0.0014 ** Yes t=4.777 df=8 0.3567 ns No t=0.9780 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.1257 ns No t=1.710 df=8 Table 3 RQA Analysis Subjects % Rec % Det % Lam T.T. Ratio Entropy Max Line Trend Y1 0.171 0.342 0.685 3.000 2.000 0.000 3 0.090 Y2 0.391 33.842 0.148 3.000 86.638 1.491 8 -0.252 Y3 0.132 1.037 0.000 0.000 7.859 0.000 7 -0.216 Y4 0.161 0.481 0.000 0.000 2.979 0.000 4 -0.079 Y5 0.369 9.716 0.158 3.000 26.313 1.777 8 -0.344 O1 3.011 53.349 24.458 4.181 17.721 2.247 22 -2.743 O2 2.941 16.617 15.304 3.807 5.650 2.435 18 -7.875 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1115 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology O3 1.027 10.087 6.927 3.773 9.824 1.984 16 -1.119 O5 1.099 11.384 19.940 3.850 10.356 2.524 15 -0.744 O6 1.389 21.329 33.343 4.089 15.351 2.835 30 -1.452 Vt3-13 9.354 81.594 88.203 9.482 8.723 4.086 185 -21.035 Vt2-67 6.137 72.819 78.434 11.743 11.865 4.140 85 -1.163 Vt1-26 3.294 63.040 75.824 6.100 19.136 3.783 99 -3.408 Vt1-15 22.430 94.955 96.215 42.409 4.233 6.057 617 -70.089 Vt1-03 12.528 87.955 91.904 15.395 7.021 4.632 281 -20.9 Vf2-30 3.756 37.225 55.763 15.284 9.911 3.481 94 -7.896 Vf2-71 0.371 2.446 0.159 3.000 6.598 1.677 9 0.092 Vf1-8013 1.173 6.098 8.214 3.852 5.197 1.476 12 0.117 Vf1-217 20.904 15.356 0.018 4.750 0.735 1.929 21 -0.883 Vf1-115 18.555 96.544 97.762 40.177 5.203 5.722 557 -59.495 Table 4 Statistical analysis of RQA results (t-Test) % DET Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.2245 ns No P value 0.6504 P value summary ns Are means signif. No different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=0.4708 df=8 t=1.316 df=8 Oi vs Vti Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0004 *** Yes P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=5.911 df=8 0.0287 * Yes t=2.663 df=8 % Lam Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0021 ** Yes P value 0.55 P value summary ns Are means signif. No different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=0.6241 df=8 t=4.476 df=8 Oi vs Vti Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df P<0.0001 *** Yes P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=11.21 df=8 0.0262 * Yes t=2.722 df=8 T.T. Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value ISSN: 2153-8212 0.0201 P value Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. 0.2161 www.JCER.com 1116 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df * Yes P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=2.894 df=8 Oi vs Vti ns No t=1.343 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0798 ns No P value 0.7166 P value summary ns Are means signif. No different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=0.3761 df=8 t=2.006 df=8 Ratio Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value 0.4308 P value summary ns Are means signif. No different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=0.8296 df=8 Oi vs Vti P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0428 * Yes t=2.406 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value 0.647 P value summary ns Are means signif. No different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=0.4757 df=8 P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.1523 ns No t=1.582 df=8 Entropy Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0034 ** Yes P value 0.5926 P value summary ns Are means signif. No different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=0.5572 df=8 t=4.101 df=8 Oi vs Vti Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0011 ** Yes P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=4.996 df=8 0.0968 ns No t=1.881 df=8 Max Line Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0013 ** Yes t=4.859 df=8 Oi vs Vti 0.2956 ns No t=1.119 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) ISSN: 2153-8212 P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0437 * Yes P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. 0.4477 ns No www.JCER.com 1117 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology t, df t=2.393 df=8 t, df t=0.7984 df=8 Table. 5 Calculation of Variability of R-R signals by CZF method. Subject (total VLF (sec2) variability-sec) VT VLF LF (sec2) HF (sec2) LF HF LF/HF VLF/(LF+HF) normal Y1 1.398 0.113 0.306 0.619 0.495 0.123 Y2 1.783 0.207 0.541 1.072 0.505 0.128 Y3 1.228 0.087 0.263 0.448 0.588 0.122 Y4 2.057 0.404 1.006 1.743 0.577 0.147 Y5 1.239 0.103 0.291 0.520 0.559 0.127 O1 0.756 0.040 0.102 0.189 0.541 0.136 O2 0.640 0.009 0.031 0.099 0.314 0.072 O3 0.711 0.029 0.085 0.179 0.473 0.108 O5 0.577 0.022 0.058 0.121 0.479 0.120 O6 0.817 0.044 0.127 0.248 0.512 0.116 Vt3-13 3.214 0.072 0.445 1.714 0.260 0.033 Vt2-67 2.453 0.199 0.705 1.839 0.384 0.078 Vt1-26 2.818 0.385 1.076 2.221 0.484 0.117 Vt1-15 5.562 3.397 0.276 2.779 0.099 1.112 Vt1-03 2.141 0.113 0.439 1.223 0.359 0.068 Vf2-30 3.106 0.451 1.272 2.608 0.488 0.116 Vf2-71 2.833 0.361 0.993 2.110 0.471 0.116 Vf1-8013 4.439 0.905 2.650 5.709 0.464 0.108 Vf1-217 6.641 2.461 6.424 12.597 0.510 0.129 Vf1-115 3.708 0.020 0.118 0.976 0.121 0.018 Ventricular Tachycardia Ventricular Fibrillation Table 6. Statistical analysis of results obtained by CZF method (t-Test) VT Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary ISSN: 2153-8212 0.0011 ** Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. P value P value summary 0.001 ** www.JCER.com 1118 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Yes Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=4.980 df=8 Oi vs Vti Yes t=5.040 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0032 ** Yes P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=4.162 df=8 0.3497 ns No t=0.9933 df=8 VLF Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0321 * Yes P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=2.590 df=8 Oi vs Vti 0.0956 ns No t=1.889 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.2464 ns No P value 0.9936 P value summary ns Are means signif. No different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=0.008276 df=8 t=1.251 df=8 LF Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0219 * Yes P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=2.837 df=8 Oi vs Vti 0.0817 ns No t=1.991 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.007 ** Yes P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df t=3.601 df=8 0.1665 ns No t=1.522 df=8 HF Yi vs Oi Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0188 * Yes t=2.936 df=8 Oi vs Vti 0.0585 ns No t=2.205 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df ISSN: 2153-8212 P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0001 *** Yes t=6.829 df=8 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.2159 ns No t=1.344 df=8 www.JCER.com 1119 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Table 7. Statistical analysis of results obtained by CZF method (correlation analysis) Correlation Correlation Correlation Correlation Correlation VT vs. VLF VT vs. LF VT vs. HF VT vs. LF/HF VT vs.VLF/( LF+HF) Yi 0.952 (*) 0.951 (*) 0.979 (**) n.s. n.s. Oi n.s. 0.879 (*) 0.923 (*) n.s. n.s. Vti 0.953 (*) n.s. n.s. n.s. 0.948 (*) Vfi 0.932 (*) 0.933 (*) 0.949 (*) n.s. n.s. Table 8 Values of Hurst exponent Subjects Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 O1 O2 O3 O5 O6 Vt3-13 Vt2-67 Vt1-26 Vt1-15 Vt1-03 Vf2-30 Vf2-71 Vf1-8013 Vf1-217 Vf1-115 ISSN: 2153-8212 H D=2-H Statistical analysis (t-Test) 0.070 0.125 0.281 1.930 1.875 1.719 Yi vs Oi 0.059 0.163 0.350 0.223 0.236 1.941 1.837 1.650 1.777 1.764 0.319 0.425 0.150 0.036 0.046 1.681 1.575 1.850 1.964 1.954 0.240 0.098 0.082 0.050 0.021 1.760 1.902 1.918 1.950 1.979 0.152 0.089 1.848 1.911 P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Oi vs Vti P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Oi vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df 0.0142 * Yes t=3.121 df=8 0.0059 ** Yes t=3.713 df=8 0.0007 *** Yes t=5.347 df=8 Vti vs Vfi P value P value summary Are means signif. different? (P < 0.05) t, df Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. 0.4414 ns No t=0.8099 df=8 www.JCER.com 1120 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Table 9 CZF: Analysis of brain waves from spontaneous EEG delta <4 Hz 4<teta<8 Hz 8<alfa<12 Hz 12<beta<30 Hz 30<gamma<50 Hz 50-125 Hz 315830.18 345604.54 342601.77 231064.75 269108.24 438748.26 1157817.77 770427.70 296854.43 420348.11 462992.76 855793.00 625474.63 430362.95 979082.92 882707.17 1546.41 1537.95 1533.87 1184.40 1412.73 2268.66 5349.84 3858.46 1635.37 2272.28 2266.45 3727.05 2916.07 2232.10 4177.67 3041.39 512.81 485.86 593.84 360.35 477.23 775.45 1487.23 1096.07 561.97 769.46 694.40 1128.16 871.99 735.97 1128.36 986.53 511.46 564.77 992.27 439.72 497.33 781.64 1438.89 1095.69 592.92 799.45 773.47 1258.53 882.63 829.91 1435.87 1046.34 124.08 158.55 236.30 135.65 143.51 206.83 395.36 335.10 177.03 243.02 264.10 474.90 234.88 261.08 481.32 355.57 40.96 65.03 100.41 50.88 69.65 96.67 181.99 127.57 107.97 135.93 105.22 209.62 108.78 123.09 175.21 146.65 Figure 1a. Autocorrelation function of subject Y2. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1121 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Figure 1b. Mutual Information of subject Y2. Figure 1c. False Nearest Neighbors of subject Y2. Figure 2a. Autocorrelation function of subject O3. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1122 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Figure 2b. Mutual Information of subject O3. Figure 2c. False Nearest Neighbors of subject O3. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1123 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Figure 3a. Autocorrelation function of subject Vt1-26. Figure 3b. Mutual Information of subject Vt1-26. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1124 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Figure 3c. False Nearest Neighbors of subject Vt1-26. Figure 4a. Autocorrelation function of subject Vf-8013. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1125 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Figure 4b. Mutual Information of subject Vf-8013. Figure 4c. False Nearest Neighbors of subject Vf-8013. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1126 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Figure 5. Recurrence Plot of the subject O2. Figure 6. Recurrence Plot of the subject Y3. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1127 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Figure 7. Recurrence Plot of the subject Vt1-26. Figure 8. Recurrence Plot of the subject Vf2-30. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1128 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology A.M. B CZF - Var (V2) 70 60 v a r 50 40 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 lags (1 lag=0.004 sec.) 4500 5000 5500 6000 Figure 9. Variability analysis of spontaneous EEG in normal subject (A.M. B) Figures for analysis of state anxiety Fig. 1 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1129 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Fig.2: Subject F.Dav. - POINCARÉ PLOT SD1 = 2.11 SD2 = 3.74 Fig.3: Subject A.Men. - POINCARÉ PLOT SD1 = 2.21 SD2 = 3.13 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1130 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Fig.4: Subject A.Mac. - POINCARÉ PLOT SD1 = 5.46 SD2 = 7.33 Fig.5: Subject D.Pet. - POINCARÉ PLOT SD1 = 5.82 SD2 = 12.96 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1131 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Fig.6: Subject M.Den. - POINCARÉ PLOT SD1 = 9.12 SD2 = 12.64 Fig.7: Subject G.Den. - POINCARÉ PLOT SD1 = 6.89 SD2 = 10.96 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1132 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1133 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1134 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Fig. 14 Subject: F. Dav. Fig. 16 Subject: A. Mac. ISSN: 2153-8212 Fig. 15 Subject: A. Men. Fig. 17: Subject: D. Pet Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1135 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Fig.18 Subject M. Den Fig.19: Subject G. Den. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1136 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Tab. 1 Statistics of Subject F. Dav Tab. 2 Statistics of Subject D. Pet. ISSN: 2153-8212 Tab. 3 Statistics of Subject G. Den Tab. 4 Statistics of Subject A. Mac. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1137 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Tab. 5 Statistics of Subject A. Men. Tab. 6 Statistics of Subject M. Den. Tab. 7: SD1 and SD2 Values calculated by PoincaréPlots Subject Name SD1 SD2 F. Dav 2,11 A. Men A. Mac ISSN: 2153-8212 Standard Variance Deviation 3,74 TestMean Value 23,40 2,70 8,30 2,21 3,13 30,30 2,40 7,36 5,46 7,33 38,10 6,10 40,86 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1138 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1070-1138 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Conte, S., Mendolicchio, L., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology D. Pet 5,82 12,96 38,30 9,00 99,89 M. Den 9,12 12,64 47,20 10,30 119,77 G. Den 6,89 10,96 53,40 8,80 82,67 Tab. 8: Fractal Analysis Subject Name Fractal Measure F. Dav. 13,200 Generalized Fractal Dimension -0,350 A. Men. 17,500 -0,397 A. Mac. 108,400 -0,450 G. Den. 230,310 -0,495 D. Pet. 269,300 -0,420 M. Den. 305,000 -0,420 Tab. 9 Frequency Domain Analysis Subject Name Frequency range Frequency range Frequency range Frequency range (0.1Hz) - Power (0.2Hz) - Power (0.3-0.4Hz) (0.5Hz) - Power Spectrum (Test Spectrum (Test Power Spectrum Spectrum (Test Score) Score) (Test Score) Score) F. Dav. 0.00050 0.00300 0.00050 0.00150 A Men. 0.00150 0.00025 0.00018 0.00050 A. Mac. 0.00900 0.00200 0.00180 0.00200 D. Pet. 0.02000 0.03500 0.00500 0.00250 M. Den. 0.03500 0.01500 0.00500 0.01000 G. Den. 0.02500 0.01000 0.00500 0.00010 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

887 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 887-888 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Relationship between Consciousness & Reality Editorial Note The Relationship between Consciousness & Reality Huping Hu* & Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT This Focus Issue features the work of Graham P. Smetham and Claus Janew on consciousness and reality. Again, our goals with this Focus Issue are: (1) bring broader awareness of Smetham and Janew‟s work by scholars and all genuine truth seekers; and (2) promote scholarly discussions of the same through commentaries and responses to commentaries in the future issues of JCER. In so doing, we hope that all of us may benefit in our endeavor to reach higher Consciousness within ourselves and build a genuine Science of Consciousness. Key Words: Consciousness, reality, relationship. Smetham’s Work Smetham‟s article in this Focus Issue is the seventh of his articles to appear in JCER. The overall theme of Smetham‟s analysis is how quantum mechanics verifies (or is consistent with) Buddhist philosophy/metaphysics. Indeed, Smetham has written a book entitled “Quantum Buddhism: Dancing in Emptiness - Reality Revealed at the Interface of Quantum Physics and Buddhist Philosophy” [1]. In his current article, Smetham illustrates the Buddhist “doctrine of the „two truths‟, the ultimate truth of the „emptiness‟ of all phenomena, and the deceptive nature of „conventional‟ truths, or appearances” and the verifications of the „two truth‟ by quantum mechanics. In essence, Smetham argues that: (1) the ultimate (deeper) reality is Buddhist concept of „emptiness‟ – the „emptiness‟ grounded in universal Consciousness; and (2) the apparent reality is Buddhist concept of „bubble‟ created within the „emptiness‟ by Consciousness. Thus, the apparent reality is deceptive and illusory and ultimate reality is „empty‟ Mindnature. To make his points on Buddhist philosophy, Smetham cites the work of Buddhist philosophers such as Dharmakirti and Nagarjuna. To support his points, Smetham cites extensively the work of well known quantum physicists such as Wheeler, Zurek, Zeilinger, Penrose & Stapp, just name a few. One of the values of Smetham‟s work lies at the clear and penetrating expositions of the interconnections between Buddhist philosophy and quantum mechanics. Further, it may be said that, according to Smetham, the relationship between Consciousness and reality is that the ultimate reality of „emptiness‟ is grounded in Consciousness and the apparent reality is created Correspondence: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D., QuantumDream Inc., P. O. Box 267, Stony Brook,, NY 11790. E-mail: editor@jcer.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 888 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| August 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 6 | pp. 887-888 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Relationship between Consciousness & Reality by Consciousness within the „emptiness‟. However, to appreciate Smetham‟s work fully, one has to read his articles. Janew’s Work Janew‟s work presented in this Focus Issue consists of three Articles and one brief Essay. These pieces are summaries of his life-long study as an independent philosopher. The overall theme of his work is how consciousness creates reality. Indeed, Janew had written a book in German entitled “Die Erschaffung der Realität (The Creation of Reality)” [2] and these summaries are also self-published as “How Consciousness Creates Reality” [3]. The best way to summarize Janew‟s work may be looking at his description of human consciousness: “our consciousness is inevitably connected to all others, and its dynamic in the widest sense is that of All That Is - the movement of one consciousness in different focuses and from individual to individual. The omnipresence of this dynamic requires an infinite velocity the instant alternation between all realities, whereby our limited consciousness, as well as its corresponding experience of a [„]slower[‟] fluctuation, only becomes possible by skipping several phases.” Janew defines [each] consciousness as “feedback and infinitesimality structure” which “are features of every form of existence” and at the same time form the "mechanism" leading to creative decisions which every consciousness therefore makes incessantly within its given possibilities. Reality means “a web of consciousnesses of infinite complexity which emerge as the cause and effect of universal creativity [of one consciousness] which is attuned yet relatively free.” Further, “[t]he infinite connection between all consciousnesses also enters into the infinitesimality structure of each one, so keeping the respective framework of possibilities open and contributing to the decision-making process without determining it completely.” To comprehend Janew‟s work, one needs understand his notions of: (1) relativity of existence; (2) the absolute universal continuum; (3) the logics of circumscription; (4) enfoldment and unfoldment; (5) the reality funnel; (6) the infinitesimality structure; (7) awareness; (8) All That Is; and (9) freedom to act; etc. Thus, there is no substitution than reading the Articles written by Janew. References 1. Graham P. Smetham (2010), Quantum Buddhism: Dancing in Emptiness - Reality Revealed at the Interface of Quantum Physics and Buddhist Philosophy. Shunyata Press (ISBN: 978-1445294308). 2. Claus Janew (2009), Die Erschaffung der Realität (The Creation of Reality). Dresden, Germany: Sumari. 3. Claus Janew (2009), How Consciousness Creates Reality. CreateSpace (ISBN: 978-1448669547) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 16 Article Inaugural Issue Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT Kant noted the importance of spatial and temporal intuitions (synthetics) in geometric reasoning, but intuitions lend themselves to different interpretations and a more solid grounding may be sought in formality. In mathematics David Hilbert defended formality, while L. E. J. Brouwer cited intuitions that remain unencompassed by formality. In this paper, the conflict between formality and intuition is again investigated, and it is found to impact on our interpretations of space-time as translated into the language of geometry. It is argued that that language as a formal system works because of an auxiliary innateness that carries sentience, or feeling. Therefore, the formality is necessarily incomplete as sentience is beyond its reach. Specifically, it is argued that sentience is covertly connected to space-time geometry when axioms of congruency are stipulated, essentially hiding in the formality what is sensecertain. Accordingly, geometry is constructed from primitive intuitions represented by one-pointedness and route-invariance. Geometry is recognized as a two-sided language that permitted a Hegelian passage from Euclidean geometry to Riemannian geometry. The concepts of general relativity, quantum mechanics and entropy-irreversibility are found to be the consequences of linguistic type reasoning, and perceived conflicts (e.g., the puzzle of quantum gravity) are conflicts only within formal linguistic systems. Therefore, the conflicts do not survive beyond the synthetics because what is felt relates to inexplicable feeling, and because the question of synthesis returns only to Hegel’s absolute Notion. Key Words: dialectical, emotion, entropy, Euclidean geometry, feeling, formality, general relativity, intuition, language, path integrals, quantum mechanics, tensor, Riemannian geometry, transcendental aesthetic. 1. Introduction Walter P. Van Stigt (see Mancosu 1988, pages 1-22) writes of the heated conflict between Brouwer’s intuitionist mathematics and Hilbert’s formalistic interpretation. Brouwer found mathematics to be a felt construction that grows out of a temporal intuition that represents itself in his two acts of intuition. Truth is discovered with the sense-certainties offered by the (particular) mathematical experience. The language of mathematics suffices to permit this passage, but truth is not hard-wired into its formality. Alternatively, Hilbert wanted to distill mathematics to the essential axioms, and to build mathematical proofs from a language that offered no remainder. Kurt Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem placed a firm limit on the scope of Hilbert’s formalistic project. And Brouwer’s intuitionist program became mired in its own demand for complex expression, negating the simplicity offered by an approach based on innate intuition. Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com. Note: This work was completed in December, 2009. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 17 In this paper I argue for an approach that takes a middle way, between the extremes of Brouwer and Hilbert. Language is essential for the expression of intuition. However, language must be rich enough to encompass its own negation; it must permit its own defeat while letting our feelings escape because they are auxillary to words. Therefore, to be meaningful, symbols and expressions must be felt, and the feeling is necessarily beyond the scope of any formal system. The intuitionist approach is to actively construct revelations from first intuitions, and in this paper I will construct geometry by navigation. This construction, or navigation, cannot be separated from the Brouwer`s "creating subject." Therefore, representing the space-time fabric as geometry also comes with a caveat that Kant`s thing-in-itself remains beyond appearance. Moreover, a free agent that is carried in a self-propelled vehicle will necessary construct a space-time mapping that is also two-sided. Likewise, in constructing an intuitionist geometry it would seem to be the case that the construction is necessarily twosided as the geometrician imparts the two-sided quality onto his, or her, geometrical creation. It is this two-sidedness that relates to Hegel’s system. Hegel’s dialectical logic is described in the Science of Logic. Innate intuition is found supporting the dialectical, even pointing to something beyond human-made words as noted in Hegel’s Philosophy of Nature. My goal is to recast space-time geometry, bringing it in line with both formality and intuition. I hope to describe space-time as an emotive field, but this will not be a simple reinvention of a sacred geomety decribed by Skinner (2006). The intuitionist geometry will relate to innate feelings, and there will be room for the beauty and awe that is typical of sacred geometry. However, there will be no geometric abstractions raised into a Platoic world of ideal forms that exist independent of Brouwer`s "creating subject." I must first describe some preliminaries. Hegel’s logic is sometimes described as the transitions from thesis to antithesis, and finally from antithesis to synthesis. This account is often criticized for being too simplistic. A better treatment is detailed by transitions of an imperative that is first found in-itself (as objectively caricatured) before it becomes for-itself (subjectively motivated) and as the imperative finally arriving at the synthesis (the state of being in-itself and for-itself). Following the simplistic treatment of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, it appears that logic may start with an imperative that pretends to be in-itself (the thesis). And an intuitionist will discover the felt emotion of euphoria that is projected which stands in contradiction to the stated objectivity. Nevertheless, the imperative extends itself, and claims more ground in its fury. Therefore, elaboration must source a vitalistic feeling. However, the day will come when the imperative finds opposition in its felt other (the antithesis). The opposition will be weak at first. Nevertheless, the antithesis expresses a growing irritation, to the point that the thesis finds its defeat in a first negation: the felt imperative transforms from being in-itself to being for-itself because it can no longer deny its own subjectivity. The antithesis with its newly discovered dualism extends beyond the territory covered by the original thesis. With the first negation the irritations are relieved, but later they will reappear because the newly realized dualism is deeply conflicted with the apparent objectivity that remains. Eventually, the antithesis is itself defeated in a second negation. And with this negation a new euphoria is discovered in the synthesis achieved by combining the thesis and its antithesis. The above logic is only a simplistic depiction of Hegel`s logic. Moreover, from an intuitionist perspective, this simple logic is too combative with thesis conflicted with its ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 18 antithesis; with the pursuit of human knowledge going uncontested even in the wake of injury. In fact, the above movement from thesis, to antithesis, and finally to synthesis, is given as a double oscillation involving irritation and its euphoria. Moreover, a real antithesis is a collective, and what is found in practice are the emotion-laden judgments (caricatures) that are assigned to particular hypotheses in a time sequence. Despite these weaknesses the three-fold pattern is found to repeat beyond thesis, antithesis, and synethesis, and this is evident in Hegel`s long elaborations. At a certain point the pattern can no longer be denied. It can only be that the synthesis represents the nondual act of self-recognition, when a euphoric thesis as content finds its supporting context in the primary irritation expressed by its antithesis. This realization is Hegel’s absolute Notion (or Concept), and to ask further questions is to return to the Notion with deeper issues. The Notion and the flow of Hegel`s logic can now be described more succinctly: the first negation is Aristotle excluding the middle term from classical reason, and this is found offending our qualitative sensibilities. In the second negation, the irritation is found healing itself as self-awareness coincides with the tension returning to source; irritation is transformed into its other, the euphoric freedom that reintroduces of the middle term into reason. The Hegelian synthesis is the realization of a two-sided oscillation: of doubt and hopefulness. Caricatures are found in the present moment coming with meanings that source Husserl’s (2001) passive synthesis, in spite of and because of the desperation projected by formality or literalism found in active synthesis. My campaign to describe space-time geometry in Hegelian terms is dogged by the same complexities that confronted Brouwer and Hilbert. Issues surrounding the translation of Hegel out of German can be vexatious, but it may be that the complexity of Hegel’s texts tends towards obfuscation even in the original language! The issue is emotional, and we must in the end be willing to admit that our own theories are incomplete. We strive for the answer that explains Hegel’s Notion, but it must be ultimately accepted that the Notion is just fundamental and therefore it has no formal reason for its existence. The Notion stands in its felt starkness, and that is about all that can be said. In section 2.1, I describe historical developments in geometry. I start with the development of Euclidean geometry, before touching on the subject of tensors, and then I move beyond to Riemannian geometry. It is necessary for us to reestablish geometry as a language, in addition to appreciating the feelings that are projected by this language. In section 2.2, I describe Kant’s transcendental intuitions that are found to support developments in geometry. In section 2.3, I describe the opposition that Hegel felt towards abstractions, including geometrical abstractions that are seen as lost intuitions that have separated themselves from dialectical language. In section 3, I argue for geometry to be seen as an intuitive construction. Accepting this establishes the connection to feeling. I also establish geometry as a two-sided language, meaning that geometry is found constructed from a logic that interacted with an emotive middle-term. In section 4, feeling and language are used in a joint framework to unpack application areas: in general relativity, Feynman’s path integrals and the mystery of quantum gravity, and in the question of entropy irreversibility. The problems surrounding Hegel’s Notion are to be found even in physics. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 19 2. Some Background 2.1 Geometry 2.1.1 Euclidean Geometry Euclid is the name given to the Greek mathematician who lived around 300 BC and authored the 13 Elements – assuming that this author was just one person. In Book I of the Elements, the axiomatic foundation of plane geometry is laid (see Artmann, chapter 4). Central to this construction are five axioms having to do with a line that connects two points, a straight line, a circle, a right angle and the famous axiom of parallels. Angles are measured in degrees, and so it was also necessary to introduce definitions for between-ness and order. In this way, an angle α smaller than angle ς could be described as α<ς. Moreover, a point between two points on a line could also be described, and points could be ordered on the line. What is found congruent is what looks the same, and this notion relates to geometric axioms as well as Aristotle’s principle of identity. Aristotle’s symbol “A” indicates a caricature, that finds a trivial tautology with itself, denoted by A=A. However, beyond abstraction the symbol “=” is found implying a relation, and a relation may conceal a middle term that indicates Kant’s synthetic a-priori. What holds an equation together is a synthetic a-priori when the equation is a law of nature that had been first conceived and latter empirically verified; law are discovered with sense-certainties that are beyond law as caricature. What is found sense-certain points to necessary conditions that came before the caricature. Ironically, Aristotle’s principle of excluded middle is found removing the synthetic from reason, and therefore axioms of congruency hold a potentiality that must be emphasize even within abstract geometry. An intuitionist geometry depends on the experiential as provided by the middle-term that is recognized. The notion of congruence implies that a line, or an angle, even a circle, can be moved in space and superimposed on itself. Two geometric objects are the same if this movement is possible. Moreover, complex geometric objects can be constructed from simple building blocks. A line AB is made, an angle α attached to its end, and a second line BC is extended in the new direction congruent with the angle. On a flat surface, an angle of α degrees can be produced either to the right or to the left. Nevertheless, if congruence is expanded to include three-dimensional rotations, in addition to two-dimensional superimpositions, then all angles of degree α look the same. All lines that can be superimposed on AB look the same, all such constructions of AB with angle α attached look the same, and finally when BC is attached to the angle this completed object looks the same as all such constructions. Construction extends the notion of congruence by mathematical induction, though in Euclid’s day this operation had yet to be formulated. The geometrical construction led to an equivalence class containing all such objects that look the same. As the construction was uniquely specified by line AB, angle α, and line BC, this reiterates Euclid’s congruence proposition for triangles (what Artmann calls the side-angle-side theorem on page 21). What looks the same is constructed locally, but finds agreement globally. Nevertheless, what looks the same is permitted its complexification, because something remains that has the freedom to not look the same. Euclid’s derivations are highly visual. They appeal to our visual sensibilities to the extent that Kant noticed that spatial intuitions are a-priori to subsequent syntheses, emerging from a synthesis involving reason and empiricism (see section 2.2). It is remarkable that visual reasoning can be reduced to a logical formality of relation to such an extent that the a-priori intuition becomes buried (see Reichenback 1958, section 14). The axioms of Euclidean ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 20 geometry when expressed in logical relations are found to be mutually consistent (see Nagel and Newman 1986, chapter II; Hilbert 1971, chapter 2), one of the few formal systems that escape Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. Nevertheless, the reduction of geometry to logical relations misses the importance of innate intuition in human reasoning while implying that intuition can be distilled into formality when it can’t. Perhaps it is only the formality that is supported by intuition that can make claims to consistency and completion? If length, area and volume are going to find meaning within geometry then the concept of magnitude becomes fundamental, and with this opening new metric axioms are established. Some of these are first described in Book V of Euclid’s Elements (see Artmann, 1991, chapter 14). Weyl’s (1952, chapter 1) affine geometry is constructed from the axioms that characterize congruence by translations, and it finds itself restricted just like plane geometry. Weyl extends beyond affine geometry by adding metric axioms too. Metric functions, that measure such things as distance, are understood to be part of the axiomatic foundation of modern Euclidean geometry. Hilbert (1971) provides a comprehensive axiomatic foundation for geometry that has survived to the present time. However, Brouwer questioned the immutability of grounding axioms due to their stated arbitrariness that source an entity from language and thus find themselves far removed from intuitionist mathematics. For example, to declare that the real line is continuous by definition is to ignore the realization that continuity and discreteness are not reducible (see Van Atten 2004, chapter 3). A continuous line can be constructed by intuitionist mathematics that is not restricted to language: what is needed is Brouwer’s choice sequence that engages a comprehending subject. Weyl (see Mancosu 1998, pages 93 to 101) refers to the continuum as a “medium of free becoming.” A compromise is reached by noting that axioms are mathematical entities that have been created, and are permitted by Brouwer’s second act of intuition (e.g., describing the demand of congruence). The axioms become spatial intuitions leaving Brouwer’s first act of intuition as a temporal one. Brouwer’s temporal intuition slips away from this geometry, yet in order for any language to function properly this escaping intuition must be something that is starkly felt, as required by Brouwer. We are left with axioms that can be felt or, stated another way, with axioms that cry out for empirical verification. 2.1.2 Tensors Tensors find their beginning in Euclidean geometry; they are retained as necessary components of Riemannian geometry. Tensors are highly complex expressions of human intuition, pushing the limits of comprehension. The word “tensor” implies a connection to the root-word “tension”, which can only be described in terms of innate feeling if we are to leave open possibilities beyond abstract caricature. Such tensors-as-feeling must necessarily provide a two-sided avenue otherwise the abstract caricature would extinguish the innate feeling upon which it rests. The simplest tensor, the scalar, is said to be of order zero. It is a single quality that looks the same from all points of view, where points of view can change depending on coordinate transformations. Therefore, in tensors (even beyond order zero) we see an extension of congruency applied over all permissible variations offered by the geometry. If volume is to indicate a metric that finds local and global agreement, then there must be a way to describe volume as a zero-order tensor given all the various ways coordinates can be represented by geometry. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 21 The vector is the next more complex tensor above the scalar. The vector has order 1. A vector, however, can be of two distinct varieties; it can transform covariantly or contravariantly given a transformation of coordinates offered by geometry. The geometry supplies coordinates to represent a vector x. The vector stands in relation to a basis, another collection of column vectors b1, b2, ... bn. And the coordinates are given by the contravariant components c1, c2, ... cn, where: x=c1b1 + c2b2 + .... + cnbn = Bc (matrix and vector multiplication) Stacking the basis vectors into a matrix B, and transforming these into a new set of basis vectors B′=BA (by matrix multiplication), automatically transforms the components by the formula c′=A-1c where c is a column vector containing c1, c2, ... cn, and c′ is a vector of transformed components. The indicated transformation is linear (BA), but it need not be so. Nevertheless, this is enough to indicate a contravariant relationship, going from c to c′. The vector x can also be represented by the reciprocal basis Q ={q1, q2, .... qn}, where QT=B-1, and this gives the covariant components, a column vector d containing d1, d2, ... dn where: x=d1q1 + d2q2 + .... + dnqn = Qd The transformation BA also transforms d to d′ by the covariant relation d′=ATd. A first order tensor will either transform covariantly or contravariantly, and a covariant (or contravariant) vector will always remain a covariant (or contravariant) vector after the coordinate transformation. The form (covariant or contravariant) of a vector is an invariant, providing another congruency. The contraction of covariant and contravariant components, given by d1c1 + d2c2 + .... + dncn = dTc (vector multiplication) is also an invariant scalar (tensor of order 0). And, provided x is a vector in Euclidean geometry, this particular contraction gives the square magnitude of x as something that looks the same for all coordinate transformations. Tensors can be of any order, where each level of the order permits either a covariant or contravariant transformation of components. A second order tensor is like a square matrix, with two types of components. In tensor notation, superscripts are usually reserved for the contravariant class while subscripts are reserved for the covariant class. Therefore, Tvu is a second order tensor representing contravariant component v and covariant component u. Tensor contractions also generalize, by setting any contravariant class equal to any covariant class, and summing over the dimension where components vary within the selected class. In general this reduces a tensor of order N to a tensor of order N–2. A tensor of order M can be multiplied to a tensor of order N to produce a tensor of order M + N. This level of algebraic book-keeping is necessary to keep track of congruency while one coordinate system is transformed into another. A good example is provided by a scalar function f(y) that is said to look the same for all coordinate systems that transform y. The function f(y) can be represented by an infinite tensor series: f(y+dy) = f(y) + ΣiTidyi + ½ΣijTij dyidyj + ..... where higher order covariant tensors ,Ti, Tij, …, lurk beneath the specification of f(y) as a scalar fuction, and the differentials, dyi, dyj, … , act as contravariant tensors. Each term in ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 22 the series is found to be an invariant scalar found by contraction.This series is not the normal Taylor series found by differentiating f(y), but this series is found agreeing with the Taylor series term for term as the differentials, dyi, tend to zero. The fact is that the covariant tensors represented in this series are underdetermined given f(y) and its derivatives. As tensors present themselves contravariantly and covariantly, the above tensor series can be re-expressed in terms of the contravariant components Ti, Tij, … and the covariant components dyi, dyj, … : f(y+dy) = f(y) + ΣiTidyi + ½ΣijTij dyidyj + ..... The two tensor series represent different versions of the same series, the only difference is the emphasize given to contravariant and covariant components. To emphasize the contravariant is to emphasize a direct accessment of n basis vectors. To emphasize the covariant is to emphasize an indirection accessment of basis vectors: replacing a vector with the orthoganl projection formed by the remaining n-1 vectors, and doing this in turn for each of n vectors. This implies that Tij and Tij represent the same second order tensor expressed differently, among the other tensors that are also present. Starting from any point, it is possible to navigate the geometry by following a map that moves an amount that agrees with either the contravariant or covariant components by accessing the basis vectors accordingly. This navigation is provided by an intuitionist construction. However, the logical map so generated tends to be extrensic, and it can miss the local details that are recovered by returning to the intrensic surface features. To find an invariant it becomes necessary to contract tensors again, bringing together both contravariant and covariant componets. The map need not agree with the territory, and so geometery is found two-sided. That which underlies the two-sided formality is sufficient to support our human understanding, which is beyond the formality. It is interesting that a tensor may represent something that is sense-certain, for example stress. The quantitative is merely translated into the formality provided by geometry, but because the tensor is two-sided the qualitative distinctions are fully sublated in the stipulated congruency. The beauty we feel when looking at a tensor equation is our own, this quality has escaped from the tensor formality. 2.1.3 Riemannian Geometry Euclid’s fifth postulate, the axiom of parallels, leads to the flat Euclidian geometry. A version of the fifth postulate states that for any line l, and a point A removed from l, there is a unique line l′ through A that is parallel to l (Greenberg 1974, pages 18 to 20). Euclidian parallel lines never intersect. Greenberg tells us that the axiom of parallels was never readily accepted among mathematicians. Part of the problem is that this axiom cannot be constructed from primitive intuitions that emerge from experience. Greenberg writes that the fifth postulate is different from the other axioms, because “we cannot verify empirically whether two lines meet, since we can draw only (finite) segments, not lines.” We are forced to justify the axiom of parallel indirectly, for example by verifying that the angles of a triangle add to 180 degrees. However, Euclid’s interpretation of geometry was discovered to be non-privileged, as elliptic and hyperbolic geometries were discovered once the fifth postulate was relaxed. What are needed for geometrical representation are grid lines that are somehow constructed from primitives. This need is studied again in Section 3, but it suffices to point ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 23 out that the flat Euclidean geometry was not special beyond its flat grid lines. Moving to the most sophisticated treatment of differential geometry is where Riemannian geometry enters (developed by Gauss, Riemann, Minding and many others). Grid lines correspond to the components x representing a vector that points to a location in space. But this vector is now a tensor, and we may stipulate that the components x transforms contravariantly. Moving beyond the coordinates (components) that might as easily correspond to the Euclidian grid we find not the flat surface at point x, but an innate curvature. The curvature may be denoted by guv, a second order tensor that transforms covariantly, called the fundamental metric tensor. In Riemannian geometry the fundamental metric tensor is rarely made redundant given the magnitudes expressed along grid line. Rather length is measured by integrating over a contraction, |Σuvguvdxudxv|½, from location to location. The locating grid lines and the fundamental metric tensor represent a two-sided geometry. 2.2 Kant’s Transcendental Aesthetic Kant (see Meiklejohn 1990, pages 21-43) noted that the form of space indicates an extension beyond our self and provides a representation of an external three-dimensional reality. Points removed could coexist in space. Moreover, this spatial form comes before experience, i.e. as an a-priori intuition that supports experience. Kant also noted that the form of time indicates an internal dimension. Unlike space, time unfolds in one dimension. It represents a succession of prior points, and a future yet to be navigated. While the self feels a sense of permanence, time points do not coexist like spatial points. The temporal form comes before experience and so it too comes as an a-priori intuition that supports experience. Space and time are different intuitive forms, but they are surely interrelated. The time intuition grounds what coexists in space, as surely as the space intuition grounds what changes as a singular progression. The thing-in-itself remains beyond our spatial and temporal intuitions. But these intuitions are pure forms. Intuitions are discovered as syntheses, as much as agreements between reason and empiricism, and these can exist in thought. These pure thoughts can give their support to mathematics and abstract geometry. In Kant’s day, Euclidean geometry was believed to be the obviously correct geometry that had abstracted truth from physical space. However, it is a misconception to see Kant’s “transcendental aesthetic” as an unqualified endorsement of Euclidean geometry, despite the many claims to the contrary (Randall 1998, Palmquist 2001). At best, Kant describes an a-priori, or a transcendental geometry, that need not stop at Euclidean geometry as a pure form. The fact that today Riemannian geometry has replaced Euclidean geometry only validates Kant’s treatment of the a-priori: the intuitions that science is able to refine are again found as a-priori conditions emerging from the synthesis of reason and empiricism. Moreover, Euclidean geometry is only well represented by the spatial dimensions where extension is felt. The time dimension indicates a unidirectional succession that is not reversible. The transcendental geometry that had been felt a-priori was already very different to a four-dimensional Euclidean Geometry, even in Kant’s day. Nevertheless, section 3 shows how Euclidean geometry as a pure form can serve as an extrinsic component to an otherwise rich space-time geometry. The irony is that Einstein was able to unify time and space in special relativity, but section 3 shows that we still ended up with a two-sided geometry indicating a synthesis of both the intrinsic and the extrinsic. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 24 2.3 Hegel’s Objection Hegel reacted against a pure intuition that exalted itself by the quantitative extensions that are typical of mathematics. These expressions tend to complexity, and Hegel was critical of complex searches that are unable to feel their qualitative origin (see Miller 1969, page 228) . The one-sided expression that goes on and on is only Hegel’s “spurious infinite” that keeps repeating its self while never discovering anything new. Hegel writes that “the hollowness of this exaltation, which, in scaling the ladder of the quantitative, still remains subjective, finds expression in its own admission of the futility of its efforts to get nearer to the infinite goal, the attainment of which must, indeed, be achieved by quite a different method,” (Miller, page 229). The extension of an axiomatic system is post-synthetic, but what gives meaning to the grounding axioms provides a qualitative distinction that tends to get ignored given the complex expression that can grow out of the grounding axioms. Hegel was interested in excavating the qualitative; he wanted to dig deeply into Kant’s synthetic apriori to approach the thing-in-its-self. He disagreed with Kant, believing that it was possible to see and reason beyond the synthesis – through a dialectical logic that respected the union of opposites and permitted a passage into the transcendental. Hegel’s logic has no axiomatic beginning: what is there has to be discovered. Hegel’s weakness was his aversion to abstract mathematics, including geometry. Kant’s transcendental geometry was one-sided, unable to see beyond its grounding axioms. Hegel writes that “axioms […] considered in and for themselves, require proof as much as definitions and divisions, and the only reason they are not made into theorems is that, as relatively first for a certain standpoint, they are assumed as presuppositions,” (Miller, page 808). The dialectical passage could not be found in Euclidean geometry, and what is required is nothing less than Hegel’s Notion. There was no union of opposites in geometry, Hegel (Miller, pages 813-814) writes: "It is only because the space of geometry is abstraction and void of asunderness that it is possible for figures to be inscribed in the indeterminateness of that space in such a manner that their determination remain in fixed repose outside another and posses no immanent transition into an opposite." These beliefs were Hegel’s mistakes, but in fairness Hegel`s objections were raised against formalistic mathematics and not the intuitionist version presented here. If anything, an opposite finds itself in its own reflection, and reflection reaches its highest expression within the structure provided by a projective geometry invented by an intuitionist. Euclidean geometry was to pass over into Riemannian geometry, but Hegel only vaguely anticipated this future event. He had hardened his heart against mathematics, and he could not understand that geometry was itself a language. Kant’s a-priori intuition was still there, looking for its reflection in a way that Hegel could appreciate. Hegel writes that “ the socalled explanations and the proof of the concrete brought into theorems turns out to be partly a tautology, partly a derangement of the true relationship, and further, too, a derangement that served to conceal the deception practiced here by cognition, which has taken up empirical data one-sidedly, and only by doing so has been able to obtain its simple definitions and principles”, (Miller, page 815). The beauty of geometrical intuition had to wait, even as Marx, Engels and Lenin acknowledged the dialectical nature of mathematics (see Kol’man and Yanovskaya, 1931). Marxist materialism wanted to extinguish the strong intuitions felt by the likes of Weyl and Brouwer. Nevertheless, the quantitative is to pass over into the qualitative, and the Divine is to spring from geometry as the sense-certain intuition is felt again. Freedom is discovered even in the one-sided drive to extinguish ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 25 intuition as permitted by Hegel’s first negation. The second negation turns Marx on his head and returns Hegel to his upright position. 3. The Hegelian Synthesis 3.1 Route Invariance and One-pointedness Duration and distance cannot be defined separately: duration is a distance traveled by light; distance is a duration required by light (i.e., given the discoveries of special relativity). Straightness is a one-pointed extension given by one unit of distance, an extension that leaves no shadow in a perpendicular space. Curvature is an adjustment in orientation that is not indicated by prior movements involving duration, distance and straightness. A constructive treatment of these definitions will be presented in section 3.2. A rigid body acts as a ruler that measures distance, and can be transported to its end and extended in a one-pointed direction. The rigid body defines endpoints simultaneously, and only through such declaration can time be sublated in space. This provides a method to measure length while giving the false impression that duration is not involved. The record of each extension can be collected into a single vector to provide the coordinates of an endpoint denoted by A. The movement that progresses from the origin to A, and is measured by rigid body placements, produces the coordinates as a tabulation of the placement information (the ruler’s length and its directions given that the ruler has the property of one-pointedness). One-pointedness indicates simple directionality, the ability to point at something, and it will be discovered related to the property of route-invariance. The nature of the placement information comes into question. The agent that moves the ruler from position to position, the same agent that records the placement information, might also hold the abstract understanding of Euclidean geometry. This abstract understanding of geometry will suggest how the placement information is to be processed. The coordinates of A are given by v1+v2+...vn, where vi ∈ RN (N=3 from observation) is the adjusted placement of the ruler at position i-1, |vi| is the ruler’s length, and vi is pointed in a direction that may differ from vi-1 depending on the curvature perceived at placement i-1 (i=1, 2, ... n). The ruler placements, and the ensuing vector additions, must lead to unique coordinates of A if this calculation scheme is to make any sense. Yet the ruler that moves from the origin to A can proceed by many routes. This assumption is easily confirmed on our planet earth. The vector additions going from the origin to A can proceed by many different paths, into deep valleys and up tall mountains, or even by the shortest path that is available to birds. It matters not which path is selected in our ruler placements, the same coordinates for A are retrieved each time without error. This invariance property is not implied by the definitions of duration, distance, straightness, and curvature. Something else beyond these definitions is behind this property if we are to progress beyond Euclidean geometry. Moreover, the vectors that go into the summation have no necessary order. Vector addition is a communicative operation, giving the same answer independent of the order of addition. Adding the vectors in reverse only signifies a different path to A, even if the ruler disappears and finds passage well beyond our normal space-time perceptions and then magically reappears at A. Route-invariance is a property of a coordinate system, within which information contained in the coordinates that permit the passage from the origin to point A is invariant to the particular path to be taken. This information is teleological as it relates to a goal, and ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 26 it is contextual as it is opposed to one-pointedness. If at the (i-1)-th step a ruler’s orientation sensed from distance, straightness and curvature is encoded into a vector vi ∈ RN, then route-invariance in Euclidean geometry implies v1+v2+...vn = w is a constant for all paths starting at the origin and ending at point A with coordinates w ∈ RN. To accommodate time as understood from special relativity, the measuring paths are required to share a common proper time in that their departure from the origin is jointly coincident while their arrival at A is jointly coincident; or these occurrences can be assumed to be coincident to good approximation. Even if space is innately of higher dimension beyond three, and the incomplete specifications given by vi ∈ R3 (i=1, 2, ... n) are only higher dimensional projections onto an imagined 3-D manifold, the route-invariance property is still active as seen in the incomplete projections. Letting the ruler’s length shrink to zero preserves the route-invariance property for general curves. The route-invariance property is a necessary condition if a coordinate system is to have logical meaning. The coordinates of A provide the logical signature of going from the origin to A. Route-invariance is a condition of logical passage assuming I am pointing to A on a map and asking a taxi to take me to A. More generally, this condition is necessary for a grid, otherwise geometric representation is not possible. But note that this grid is extrinsic, and it therefore says little about the terrain and landscape that is to be discovered going from the origin to A. The landscape is the intrinsic geometry where curvatures are to be discovered relative to associated grid-points. Duration, distance and straightness are also re-defined at the grid-points making local and global agreements. The taxi driver might take me for a real ride from origin to point A – including extra travel time and a concomitantly excessive charge on my credit card! There is a tendency to emphasize geometrical invariance and to reduce geometry to the intrinsic surface, even to excommunicate the extrinsic from science and mathematics. An extrinsic coordinate system is not uniquely determined. However, a curved intrinsic surface stands in relation to a flat extrinsic geometry. In the absence of an extrinsic geometry where route-invariance clearly emerges from first principles one must question what curvature means. Intrinsic route-invariance ought to be transparent, but what we generally discover are obtuse properties that are smuggled in without mention. The extrinsic grid can remain flat to protect Euclidean route-invariance. An extrinsic direction can always be related to a direction along a unique geodesic that is confined to the intrinsic surface. Moreover, the entire extrinsic basis forms a set of independent directions that can be parallel transported from grid-point to grid-point along geodesics. The transported direction set reflects how the directions have turned, thereby projecting the extrinsic grid onto the intrinsic surface. This relation between the extrinsic and intrinsic cannot be severed. In general, intrinsic grid-lines will not protect an Euclidean routeinvariance, and without some kind of route-invariance the coordinates are hardly meaningful due to the passage from origin to point A becoming undetermined (i.e., if route-finding determinations are to emerge only from primitive definitions such as duration, distance and straightness, and not smuggled in covertly). Extrinsic route-invariance implies that no two parallel grid-lines can cross; yet it may happen that the projected grid-lines on the intrinsic surface may cross (e.g., two geodesics can cross). In this situation, two (or more) extrinsic coordinates correspond to one point on the intrinsic surface. The extrinsic grid is well matched with the intrinsic surface when a one-to-one mapping is maintained; otherwise such operations as surface integration become a challenge. Extrinsic route-invariance is an apriori assumption whenever a coordinate is mentioned. The coordinates must contain ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 27 enough information to permit one-pointed passages from the origin to a point removed, and the information must be transparently obtainable from first principles. 3.2 Geometrical Construction Distance, straightness and curvature are defined as constructive measurements that respect route-invariance, and are based on no further differentiation provided by an exterior agency. To measure is to engage the synthesis of reason and empiricism, permitting an escape beyond Euclidean geometry with its implied abstractions. To measure duration we measure distance, the distance a clock’s hands have moved or the distance traveled by light. Likewise, to measure distance we measure duration, the amount of time required for something to move between two points. To hide time in pure distance and the endpoints of a rigid body are declared simultaneously. We can add distances together, and we can subtract distances to retreat to a prior position where simultaneity is recognized with rigid bodies. Our experiences with duration are different as it has been possible to add too duration while subtraction is forbidden; i.e., we don’t experience time reversal. The time passage is irreversible and indicates a broken symmetry. A consideration of time is a-priori to the recognition of spatial simultaneity, and more generally simultaneity is only relative to the motions found among reference frames. We will start our construction with duration and distance; in much the same way that Hegel started his dialectical passages from being and nothingness, which were later transformed into becoming. A reality where distance and duration are experienced, and nothing else, is limited to one temporal dimension and one spatial dimension. There are in fact more dimensions, but our capacity to experience them requires something beyond the primitive sense imprints of distance and duration: it requires sense-certainty, and the synthesis of empiricism and reason to which this gives rise. Distances in higher dimensions can always be projected onto a one-dimensional geometry where route-invariance applies. Routeinvariance in one dimension honors the fact that distances can be added and subtracted while preserving the meaning of simultaneous position. One-pointed distance passes over into straightness, but sensing straightness implies the perception of a perpendicular space. This implies no less than two straight directions, s and s⊥, indicating a direction and its perpendicular other. An extension in direction s that goes undetected when projected onto s⊥ is called straight. The undetected nuance belonging to the extension that is projected into s⊥ is the first negation that differentiates pure distance from straightness. It is now possible to transport both s and s⊥ to the end of the extension in the direction of s; this is the so-called parallel displacement again. A new straight extension from the new point can be made in the direction of s provided that its projection into s⊥ continues to vanish. This process of finding these straight extensions can be continued in like fashion, and the extensions can be added together to provide an overall distance on a route of travel that is called straight. By working with infinitesimal extensions, a curve can be so constructed that it is found straight. Now route-invariance applies in two dimensions, and honors the fact that distances in direction of s and s⊥can be added and subtracted while preserving the meaning of both simultaneous position and parallel displacement. The recognition of simple straightness does not imply sufficient agency to see more than two spatial dimensions. Straight distances in higher dimensions can always be projected onto a two-dimensional geometry where straightness is perceived in its primitive form. A curve that is not straight shows simple curvature, but this negative does not imply a transition to a wider awareness in the Hegelian sense. The transition where straightness ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 28 passes directly over into curvature is described by Hegel’s second negation, and is provided by primary curvature. Seeing primary curvature implies that distances built from straight movements can later be shown to be non-straight; i.e., a new direction r is recognized that is perpendicular to both s and s⊥ where the extension along the direction s when projected into r does not vanish. It happens that the straightness offered by s and s⊥ produces a bent curve when a third dimension is later sensed more fully, as indicated by the discovery of r. Route-invariance now requires three spatial dimensions to protect the meaning of simultaneous position and parallel displacement, while permitting primitive definitions that appeal to our prior intuitions. Belief in a flat earth gave way to an understanding of a spherical earth due to the felt realness of the third dimension. The perception of primary curvature does not imply sufficient agency to see more than three spatial dimensions. The system of constructive definitions (discovered locally and finding their agreements globally) requires at minimum perception in four dimensions: three spatial and one temporal. Agency is always indicated by local and global agreements, even constructions discovered by their emerging from primitive definitions that appeal to our prior intuitions. These are conditions of necessity, not sufficient conditions. The dimensions we discover are starkly real; it is sufficient that there be enough dimensionality for our self-awareness and no more, given that impetus mirrors Hegel`s Notion. What is sufficient is that any higher dimensions are projected onto the dimensions that awareness can accommodate, leaving our primitive intuition more or less intact. It cannot be that awareness of higher dimensions destroys what was learned from the first few dimensions. The impetus that sought measurement has no where else to go in our normal understanding of time and space, as is evident by our bluntly seen three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. The impetus that is the pure understanding can see the Trinitarian archetype that signifies self-recognition and Hegel`s Notion, and so it has no more need for crude measures of time and space. This is not to say there are no more dimensions, it is only that the impetus must now be directed inward to find new dimensions as the impetus learns to self navigate further. And given our complext abilities to naviagate spacetime it is clear that there are many more dimenisons beyond what is normally attributed to space and time. Once arrogance is recognized by Hegel`s “cunning of reason,” it becomes necessary to suspend the wayward activity in anticipation of arrogance`s negation. Arrogance is blinded by its emotional attachment to the extrinsic, and a new direction is sough coming from the intrinsic. I speculated that the new direction relates to the coming awareness of a higher dimension. It is not only humans that can navigate the space-time fabric while showing great mastery. Migratory birds fly hundreds of miles, if not thousands, to overwinter in warm climates. Salmon return from the open ocean to the stream bank of their birth, to lay eggs for a new generation before dying. The Monarch butterfly has equally amazing migratory instincts. The hint is that life can navigate the space-time fabric by relating to something vital that carries intentionality (or teleology) and that is hidden within the fabric. If space-time is to be caricatured well by geometry, honesty demands a two-sided construction lest my creation be not beautiful. Bennett (1956, Chapter 15) describes a universal geometry with a necessary six dimensions, enough to distinguish all interacting occasions that are recognized in the physical world. However, the extra dimensions probably represents an infinity that cannot be reached by reason working alone; agreeing with Nicholas of Casa (see On Learned ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 29 Ignorance). It is unlikely that a one-sided reason can find perfect agreement between the extrinsic and intrinsic, or between one-pointedness and route-invariance. The ladder of dimensionality then must engage our emotions, and so the extra dimensions are probably not the qualities predicted by typical science that restricts itself to the mechanics on Riemannian geometry. The impetus most also tame our emotions! The recognition of the Hegelian synthesis represents the passing of awareness into higher dimensions where both doubt and hopefulness can act, but this is not the activity of a one-sided reason. 3.3 Geometrical Language My usage of duration, distance, and straightness were motivated because these very qualities are found necessary for a logical grid-system that facilitates the correct application of maps and coordinate systems (as discovered with Euclidean geometry). The map is not the territory, however. The map only permits navigation to retrace the intuitionist trail. The grid-system is only extrinsic to the intrinsic surface features. It remains only to engage the concrete territory and negate the extrinsic map by becoming aware of an extra dimension where a more local curvature is discovered, and where the covariant is found joined to the contravariant. The geometry just described is the synthesis of the extrinsic and the intrinsic, and it is not necessarily the Euclidean geometry originally imaged by Kant that found its support from a-priori intuitions. It is only the extrinsic that is so constructed to be isomorphic or unconflicted with Euclidean geometry. The intrinsic may represent an unusual topology or a finite region embedded inside an Euclidean geometry, otherwise the intrinsic is implied by its curvature. The extrinsic may signify the domain of a function, f: Rn →Ω, that indicates curvature. The synthetic I have described above is more generally a Riemannian geometry. Nash (1956) showed how it was possible to embed Riemannian geometry into a higher dimensional Euclidean geometry. Morgan (1998) develops his simplified account of Riemannian geometry from manifolds embedded in Euclidean geometry. The extrinsic coordinates are the contravariant components of a tensor of order 1; the intrinsic curvatures are the covariant components of a tensor of order 2 (i.e., fundamental metric tensor, denoted by guv). The two-sided behavior of Riemannian geometry is evident from the way in which the metric tensor responds to coordinate transformation. The tensor guv transforms covariantly. However, at each point on the curved surface there are two local basis sets; one set transforms covariantly while the other transforms contravariantly. The contravariant basis can be extended globally and used as a replacement for the extrinsic basis. It is also possible to extend the local covariant basis into an extrinsic system, but in so doing the fundamental metric tensor becomes guv and transforms contravariantly. The two sides of Riemannian geometry relate to the covariant and contravariant, and these qualities are found to be joined to the extrinsic and intrinsic, depending on how the system is structured. In the process of fitting abstract geometry to concrete reality, we discover a-priori definitions that demand empirical verification. These are Reichenbach’s (1958) “coordinative definitions”, examples being duration, distance, straightness, curvature and routeinvariance. To these we must add Einstein’s constancy of light speed, and his equivalence of gravity and acceleration. In a limited sense, these find their support in the synthesis of reason and empiricism. The definitions become Kant’s a-priori that mysteriously emerge from the synthesis. Hegel’s indicates that the most fundamental entity that escapes the analytical mind is its dependence upon antecedent definitions (see Miller 1969, page 43). It ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 30 is true that space and time are necessary for the framing of experience as Kant speculated. However, it is not the case that space-time geometry is sufficient to explain the relation as it is experienced. What remains is an innate intuition that Kant felt yet it escapes reanalysis by reason, as it is a-priori. Science discovers what is necessary but not sufficient, and to inquire about sufficiency is to follow our experiences beyond the normal framework provided by science. My account preserves Kant’s transcendental aesthetic as a system built from prior intuitions that source the synthesis of reason and empiricism. The temporal intuition is strongly associated with one-pointedness (the negation of route-invariance, or the feminine aspect), the spatial intuition is associated with route-invariance (the negation of onepointedness, or the masculine aspect). The temporal and spatial intuitions signify a unity in opposites, with both indicating a raw directiveness that eventually must slip into the beyond. Kant’s peers were mistaken only with the early attachment made to Euclidean geometry, his a-priori intuitions are found to support Riemannian geometry today. I have also addressed Hegel’s criticism of geometry as the above system is permitted to unfold from a two-sided fabric, reflecting a dialectical quality in geometry given as a language. What is beyond onepointedness and route-invariance is also beyond any geometry that is only post-synthetic. What is beyond is qualitative and the source of innate intuitions. Brouwer believed that language expresses will-transmission, and beneath language is raw aggression if not a more cultivated social emotion (see Mancosu 1988, pages 40-53). It is only with the human contribution that symbols and words are found married to emotions and intuitions. Smith (2007) speculates that Hegel’s dialectic is a felt movement, and this can only be because a feeling is negated by the thought that circumscribes it. 4. Specific Examples 4.1 General Relativity Point A is something that can be pointed at, but if the rigid body (as ruler) has mass and it is thrown at a target A then the ruler can miss the target. At the ith step, the ruler with given mass will only have a momentum that is pointed in a particular direction. The prior goal of leading to point A is already encoded into the momentum. The trajectory of the ruler will encounter other factors that will cause it to change its extrinsic direction. In this sense the target A is not a target per se, rather it is a direction that is sensed along the trajectory. And what is sensed is the dullness of a rigid body that lacks agency, having only mass. The trajectory finds modifications because of its interactions with the intrinsic geometry, which includes the curvatures that are encountered. And even the dullest activity must also maintain consistency with extrinsic route-invariance as this is the only way the Divine can take flight - qualitative distinctions are permitted to escape as they are able to hide behind quantitative characteristics provided by the geometrical language. The rigid body finds the singular path among all routes that minimizes the proper time in passage - the geodesic path, the only path that can be reflected back to the extrinsic geometry where route finding has been given meaning. The ruler’s dullness can demand no more time, and is eager to take flight. This restates Einstein’s equations of motion that are derived from the principle of equivalence. Einstein’s equivalence of inertia and gravity is two-sided. Moreover, Riemannian geometry is demonstrably two-sided, and we note that the middle term that holds the twosided geometry together has escaped reason if only because Aristotle could not tolerate a logic with an emotional center. The motion of rigid bodies indicates the flux of mass that ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 31 issues forward from the gravitational tensions that are somehow woven into the fabric of space and time - a motion that might give the false impression of a deterministic clockwork universe that is independent of emotion. Einstein’s field equations are also needed to reintroduce gravitation as a tension to affect the intrinsic curvatures. This gravitational tension is no less than the expressed demand of extrinsic route-invariance paired with the requirement of intrinsic one-pointedness - a demand that is specified by the formality of general covariance leading to an invariant tensor equation that translates stress into curvature. General relativity is, therefore, true by its linguistic definitions, and the definitions have been merely translated into the language of geometry. The language emerges from stipulations that have to do with invariance, affine connexion and metrical measures (Schrödinger 1950), and all of these indicate a congruency that hides a synthetic. The language acts as a conduit to convey the meaning of tension, almost as good as the actual fabric comprised by space-time. We apply tension to the balloon by deforming it, and this simple expression has as much explanatory power as the field equations. General relativity is given by the conditions of necessity that have been built into the language. General relativity is not, however, sufficient to explain its own definitions. Einstein’s geometry is postsynthetic, and no language is sufficient to explain the magic that language offers. For example, it is sufficient to note that the balloon deforms because of outside agency, independent of the stretching potential of the balloon. And to question these definitions (that make up any law) is to question the middle terms that Aristotle tried to exclude from reason, terms that cannot be excluded that are also designed to escape into Hegel’s Notion. This leaves general relativity with its bluntness, and with a synthetic that is shrouded in qualitative distinctions that also limit application. Alternatively, taking Einstein`s equations to be absolute fixtures in a Platonic realm might equally lead to distortions or even fantasies, perhaps letting Kurt Gödel leap to the conclusion that time is an illusion (e.g., see Yourgrau, 2006, chapter 7). Gödel`s time did the affectionate work of creating an abstraction called the Gödel Universe, but his time was unable to see itself as a love of abstraction. It is plausible that absolute time is real but is an intuitive dimension (an "ideality" as Gödel stipulated), and is unable to be put into a strict formality like the Gödel universe. Perhaps time is what gives privilege to reference frames that can see even abstraction, and therefore its duty is to escape formality where such privilege is deemed impossible thereby fooling even Gödel? That is, the great escape is what gives birth to seeing our affection but only after our affection for abstraction is tamed? Is not the great escape enforced by the conservation of energy? Does not general relativity reflect the great escape while coincidentally mirroring the blunderbuss flight of dull masses? Do our affections make us equally dull? Minkoski’s “block universe” was conceived from special relativity, and it too cannot provide a justification for an absolute determinism, contrary to many literal interpretations. Geometry must return to something two-sided, to permit our escaping intuition that is unable to give absolute privilege to abstractions that are only postsynthetic. 4.2 Feynman’s Path Integrals and Quantum Gravity A photon that is projected forward, from a source to a detector, can follow various paths that are described in intuitive terms by Feynman (1985). Feynman’s approach is an intuitionist construction that describes the properties of vectors that find themselves in a two-dimensional Euclidean space. This construction is in the best tradition offered by ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 32 Brouwer’s two acts of intuition represented by time succession and the time-sublated forks that penetrate spatial possibilities (see van Atten, 2004, page 4). Therefore, depending of the mode of intuition, vectors can be combined in one of two ways: either by vector “multiplication” or “addition”. Any vector in the two-dimensional geometry indicates both a direction and a magnitude. Magnitude translates into intensity, and because intensity also relates to frequency (color) the magnitude of any vector signifies the probability of an event occurring in the quantum realm of subatomic particles such as electrons and photons. Time is translated into space, a two-dimensional direction that indicates phase. Any event that can be traced out in three spatial dimensions and one time dimension reduces itself to these two dimensional arrows from the point of view of light. Light that feels no duration sees only two-dimensional space with its one-pointedness. This is the same information contained in a clock’s hand that rotates over its history (as phase), points in a two dimensional direction and shrinks itself to reflect its own intensity. Feynman’s spatial intuition permits all possible paths from source to detector. And if the two-dimensional vectors are fixed given the context of a fork that points to different routes, the intuition of route-invariance only detects the collective state given by the quantum superposition. Two-dimensional vectors can be added, and in this way their intensities can be amplified or cancelled. The vectors among all choices offered by the fork can be added together, and route-invariance gives the same endpoint, independent of the choices. Beyond the summation all the choices look the same to route-invariance. Nevertheless, the shortest paths - the paths requiring the least time - dominate the summation, while other paths cancel. These dominant paths reflect the collective, an expression of context and teleological impetus. Feynman’s temporal intuition gives the two-dimensional vectors as a succession: instead of adding the vectors they are now “multiplied” together, with any two vectors combined into one by adding together the individual time from each vector to find the overall phase given as the new direction of the combination, and determining the magnitude of the combination (new direction) as the two magnitudes multiplied together. Feynman’s intuitions have found agreement with light and electromagnetism, and nothing else is discovered beyond these primitive forms. His approach provides an alternative to classical quantum mechanics, where wave functions can indicate states of superposition. To detect with the intuition of one-pointedness causes the wave function to collapse. A probabilistic distribution is discovered from multiplying each wave-function by its complex conjugate. The intuition of route-invariance senses the form of future possibilities in the state of superposition. One-pointedness brings an irreversible selection to this intuition, it negates the plurality while sublating any teleological causation carried by the superposition. This switches the spatial into a temporal intuition, where vectors can be multiplied again while continuing to uphold the validity of classical probability. The broken symmetry is also presented by the wave function collapse, an action that looks to be a progression from past to future. Therefore, route-invariance implies a symmetry consideration whereas onepointedness brings an action principle. This only begs the question of the cause of the collapse, as the cause is still beyond Feynman’s intuitions that are merely translated into a language. The collapse was caused by a presumed quantum gravity, and this is about all that can be said given that known quantum mechanics leaves the collapse under-determined. The probabilistic determination ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 33 leaves much unexplained, leaving little said about the future context that somehow got transported to the past. The charge of idealism may be leveled at my account. Nevertheless, quantum gravity and its connection to wave function collapse have already been implicated in human cognition and provide the basis for the orchestrated objective reduction hypothesized by Hameroff and Penrose (1996). My suspicion is that the cause of wave function collapse will slip away entirely from any formality, leaving Hegel’s Notion in its starkness. Formality is language, and as with space-time geometry, language works because something slips away while leaving a feeling in its wake. One-pointedness and route-invariance come as a-priori intuitions that find unity in opposition, and while they are constructive they leave a middle term that carries a qualitative distinction. It is no wonder that quantum gravity remains a mystery. 4.3 Entropy Irreversibility Physical laws, like those described above for general relativity and quantum mechanics, hold symmetry properties. They describe action principles that look the same from all points of view offered by any particular symmetry, and in all cases this action looks the same even if time runs backward. Laws derived from symmetry considerations cannot account for the asymmetries that show themselves in time. The asymmetries that reveal themselves are beyond these laws, and so it is here that the second law of thermodynamics intervenes and proclaims that entropy, or disorder, must increase with time. Perhaps symmetry merely points to the weakness of abstraction. Perhaps it is only symmetry that permits the reissuing of laws by subjecting them to Hegel’s second negation, while weakening the laws enough to permit the Spirit’s escape. Sections 4.1 and 4.2 reduced laws to conditions of necessity that follow in the wake of the escape, but this leaves the laws insufficient to explain Hegel’s Notion. But can Hegel’s Notion survive the second law? It has been found that attempts to explain the asymmetries from symmetries were not tenable. Ludwig Boltzmann came to see the second law as a statistical law, a law that characterizes a closed system of colliding gas molecules. The second law was not a universal. Nevertheless, there has been an over-extension of this statistical law masquerading as an explanation, when the second law remains starkly unexplained. Price (1996, chapter 2) notes that if the second law predicts the future elevation of entropy, then it also ridiculously predicts the elevation of past entropy. Albert (2000, chapter 4) indicates that the second law is incomplete, and what is also needed is a “past hypothesis” that stipulates a low entropy birth of the universe. The low entropy birth remains unexplained. Penrose (2004, section 27.13) relates this specialness to a big bang, which came from a repulsive gravity that was somehow transformed into an attraction. And if we are going to give meaning to the second law we must assume a closed system from the start, an ensemble of mindless molecules that collide and migrate randomly. Alternatively, attempts have been made to make sense out of the second law in an open universe (e.g., Chaisson, 2001). For Hegel’s Notion to fail under the second law, the second law must also survive as an explanation, and it has not. The negative argument is that the second law remains as unexplained as Hegel’s Notion. Indeed, the second law can be recast as Hegel’s second negation that negates abstract symmetry. But for this positive argument to succeed, the second law must be consistent with the intuitions of one-pointedness and route-invariance. Smith (2007) describes the second law as a duality that hides the act of self-recognition behind the act of representation. Albert (2000, chapter 7) relates thermodynamic ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 34 irreversibility to the quantum mechanical collapse of the wave function. What is represented as the collapsed wave function, as much as what is represented to the mind, is indeed irreversible. And what is irreversible is therefore one-pointed. To appreciate route-invariance one must consider the closed and gas-filled ensemble again. The heat and pressure of this container is all that is known. The particular paths taken by the colliding gas molecules are not known. Helrich (2007) tells us that “particle trajectories must be giving up”. What is expressed outwardly is only the collective behavior of mindless motion absent any collective properties. Helrich tells us that there is no present formulation for a variation principle suitable for the second law as found with laws derived from symmetries, and that such a variation principle is sought if only because it comes with a possible teleology. However, it is enough to know that what is assumed to be collective and mindless is only caricature derived from the intuition of route-invariance inflicted on a closed system. The mindless variations of the caricature are well downstream from the synthesis offered from the sensation of heat and pressure, and this is well out of reach of any teleology. The heat death is what is expected from a mindless mass, and we would expect no less from Hegel’s second negation as the Spirit returns to its source. The second law remains bluntly real, unexplained by statistics unless we are already describing a mindless mass. 5. Conclusion Space-time geometry does not have a license to caricature beyond the congruencies that are found necessary for language; these congruencies are starkly discovered and are synthetic, and it is they that provide the grounding of geometry as language. Intuition frees us from literalism because the synthetics are experiential and indicate something beyond the formality. I have described space-time as an emotive field, a substance that provides completeness merely by showing the incompleteness in the formality offered by language. In my book, Trinity, I offered the completion of general relativity and quantum mechanics. I expressed the same emotion above. Chiao (2003) describes this tension as a conflict between spatial non-separability of quantum mechanics against the complete spatial separability offered by general relativity. But in describing general relativity in the language of geometry I have noted that it is only the pure formality that offers complete spatial separability. The feeling finds itself escaping the formality. The space-time points that Greene (1999, chapter 5) concerns himself with only exist in the abstract formality. The size-less point is only postsynthetic, and downstream from the congruencies that geometry declares. General relativity says nothing about the middle term that holds the congruencies together; and general relativity says nothing about the feeling that is communicated with the geometrical language. The conflict only exists within the formality, but the congruencies already hint that space-time is full of singularities that cannot be mapped. In reducing geometry into language we discover that the conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics does not exist beyond Hegel’s Notion. It is important to note the limits of this unification. This unification is not the same as an explanation that merely emerges from additional formality (e.g., string theory), this unification is metaphysical and avoids the infinite regress. The need for additional answers returns us to Hegel’s Notion, otherwise science need not stop in its search for a formal synthesis that explains the mystery of quantum gravity. Moreover, alternative approaches (e.g., Markopoulou 2000) may offer intuitionist accounts that better describe this tension, while ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 35 respecting a truth that is necessarily dependent on the experiential; like a good story that is repeated in different words. Formality finds itself fighting intuition, even attempting to extinguish all intuitions by reducing everything into an irritating formality. Brouwer’s friendship with Hilbert was destroyed by this tension. Walter P. Van Stigt (see Mancosu 998, page 3) writes of “the unjustified and illegal dismissal of Brouwer from the editorial board of the Mathematische Annalen by Hilbert in 1928.” Like the middle term, Brouwer found himself excluded because he expressed his emotions. However, the drive to formality meets its demise in Hegel’s second negation. This is the point where euphoria is resurrected. References David Z. Albert, 2000, Time and Chance, Harvard University Press. Benno Artmann, 1999, Euclid: The Creation of Mathematics, Springer. J.G. Bennett, 1956, The Dramatic Universe: Volume One, The Foundations of Natural Philosophy, Hodder & Stoughton. Eric J. Chaisson, 2001, Cosmic Evolution: The Rise of Complexity in Nature, Harvard University Press. Raymond Y. Chiao, 2003, “Conceptual Tensions Between Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity: Are There Experimental Consquences?”, In Science and Ultimate Reality: Quantum Theory, Cosmology, and Complexity, edited by Barrow, Davies, and Harper, 254-279. Sir Arthur Eddington, 1958, Space, Time and Gravitation, Harper Torchbooks. Richard P. Feynman, 1985, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter, Princeton University Press. Marvin Jay Greenberg, 1974, Euclidean and Non-Euclidean Geometries: Development and History, third edition, W.H. Freeman and Company. Brian Greene, 1999, The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory, Vintage Books. S.R. Hameroff and R. Penrose, 1998, “Orchestrated reduction of quantum coherence in brain microtubles - a model for consciousness”, In Toward a Science of Consciousnes, contributions from the 1994 Tucson Conference. Carl S. Helrich, 2007, “Is There a Basis for Teleology in Physics?”, Zygon, vol. 42, no. 1, 97-110. David Hilbert, 1971, Foundations of Geometry, Open Court. Edmund Husserl, 2001, Analyses Concerning Passive and Active Synthesis, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Ernst Kol’man and Sonia Yanovakaya, 1931, “Hegel & Mathematics”, in Unter dem Banner des Marxismus. Immanuel Kant, (translated by J.M.D. Meiklejohn), 1990, Critique of Pure Reason, Prometheus Books. Paolo Mancosu, 1998, From Brouwer to Hilbert: The Debate on the Foundations of Mathematics in the 1920s, Oxford University Press. Fotini Markopoulou, 2000, ‘The Internal Logic of Causal Sets: What the universe Looks Like from the Inside,’ Communications in Mathematical Physics, 211, 559-583. A.V. Miller, 1969, Hegel’s Science of Logic, Humanity Books. Frank Morgan, 1998, Riemannian Geometry: A Beginner’s Guide, AK Peters. John Nash, 1956, “The Embedding problem for Riemannian manifolds”, Annals of Mathematics, (2) 63, 20-63. Stephen Palmquist, 1990, “Kant on Euclid: Geometry in Perspective”, Philosophical Mathematica II, 5:1/2, 88-113. Roger Penrose, 2004, The Road to Reality: A complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe, Vintage Books. Huw Price, 1996, Time’s Arrow and Archimedes’ Point, Oxford University Press. Allan F. Randall, 1998, “A Critique of the Kantian View of Geometry”, (http://www.elea.org/Kant/Geometry/) ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 16-36 Smith, S. P. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems 36 Erwin Schrödinger, 1950, Space-Time Structure, Cambridge University Press. Hans Reichenbach, 1958, The Philosophy of Space & Time, Dover Publications. Stephen Skinner, 2006, Sacred Geometery, Sterling Publicating. Stephen P. Smith, 2007, Trinity: the Scientific Basis of Vitalism and Transcendentalism, iUniverse. Mark van Atten, 2004, On Brouwer, Thomson Wadsworth. Hermann Weyl, 1952, Space Time Matter, Dover Publications. Palle Yourgrau, 2005, A World Without Time, Basic Books. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 773-775 773 Smith, S. P. Review of Gregg Braden's Book: The Spontaneous Healing of Belief: Shattering the Paradigm of False Limits Book Review Review of Gregg Braden's Book: The Spontaneous Healing of Belief: Shattering the Paradigm of False Limits Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT In is interesting that Braden sees reality as a computer simulation, and it comes with belief codes that act as part of the universal computer program. This admission would seem to delight materialists and science fiction writers that venture similar speculations. But Braden's usage is metaphorical, and there is a serious caveat that permits a break from a mechanistic world view: we are able to reprogram our poorly tuned beliefs, because instinctively we know that the simulation is only an illusion. Because we know that an appearance is an illusion we are able to escape the dictates of a computer program, and therefore greater reality cannot be just a simulation. You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Spontaneous-Healing-Belief-ShatteringParadigm/dp/1401916899/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: healing, belief, false limit, reality, computer simulation, code, illusion. The hard-nosed skeptic will caricature Gregg Braden's "The Spontaneous Healing of Belief" as just another "New Age" book written about how we create our own world by merely believing. I want to defend Braden's book from such criticism, and I invite skeptical readers to study this interesting book with an open mind. It is not that belief provides the easy route to New Age enlightenment, it is that Braden's "belief" involves the hard work of purification as we learn to tune ourselves with something bigger than our narrow self interests. While Braden's treatment is not perfect, it is easy to find what he intends to say in the face of would-be criticism. Negativity will not have the final answer, even when it comes with a pretense of rigor. We must also put our best foot forward in a positive sense. Braden (page xi) summarizes his understanding of scientific evidence: "Paradigm-shattering experiments published in leading-edge, peer-reviewed journals reveal that we're bathed in a field of intelligent energy that fills what used to be thought of as empty space. Additional discoveries show beyond any reasonable doubt that this field responds to us -it rearranges itself- in the presence of our heart-based feelings and beliefs. And this is the revolution that changes everything." Braden (page 3) raises a troubling point: "What if we're living our lives shrouded in the false limitations and incorrect assumptions that other people have formed over generations, centuries, or even millennia? Historically, for example, we've been taught that we are insignificant specks of life passing through a brief moment in time, limited by `laws' of space, atoms, and DNA. This view suggest that we'll have little effect on anything during our stay in this world, and when we're gone, the universe will never even notice our absence." Braden (page 16) writes: "It becomes abundantly clear that something -some intelligent force- is holding the particles of you together right now, as you read the words on this page. That force is what makes our beliefs so powerful. If we can communicate with it, then we can change how the particles of `us' behave in the world. We can rewrite the code of our reality." Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 773-775 774 Smith, S. P. Review of Gregg Braden's Book: The Spontaneous Healing of Belief: Shattering the Paradigm of False Limits Braden (page 20) writes: "The atoms of our reality either exist as matter or they don't. They're either here or not here, `on' or `off'." In the off position, Braden considers particles that are transformed into "invisible waves." Braden (page 21) writes that, "everything boils down to opposites: pluses and minuses, male and female, on and off." Braden (pages 23-24) writes: "Everything is ultimately made of the same stuff. From the dust of distant stars to you and me, ultimately everything that `is' emerges from the vast soup of quantum energy (what `could be'). And without fail, when it does, it manifests as predictable patterns that follow the rules of nature. Water is a perfect example. When two hydrogen atoms connect to one oxygen atom as a molecule of H2O, the pattern of the bond between them is always 104 degrees. The pattern is predictable. It is reliable - and because it is, water is always water." Braden (page 28) writes: "A fractal view of the universe implies that everything from a single atom to the entire cosmos is made of just a few natural patterns. While they may combine, repeat, and build themselves on larger scales, even in their complexity they can still be reduced to a few simple forms." Braden (page 31) relates belief to the universal: "Every day we offer the literal input of our beliefcommands to the consciousness of the universe, which translates our personal and collective instructions into the reality of our health, the quality of our relationships, and the peace of our world. How to create the beliefs in our hearts that change the reality of our universe is a great secret, lost in the 4th century, from the most cherished Judeo-Christian traditions." Braden (page 41) writes on healing: "Beliefs have long been known to have healing powers. The controversy centers around whether or not it's the belief itself that does the healing or if the experience of belief triggers a biological process that ultimately leads to the recovery. For the layperson, the distinction may sound like splitting hairs. While the doctors can't explain precisely why some patients cure themselves through their beliefs, the effect has been documented so many times that at the very least we must accept that there is a correlation between the body's repairing itself and the patient's belief that the healing has taken place." Braden (page 46) writes: "Just as the belief that we've been given a healing agent can promote our bodies' life-affirming chemistry, the reverse can happen if we believe that we're in a life-threatening situation." Now it is clear that Braden's "belief" is not any belief, or a statement of faith. Rather, Braden describes belief as a synthesis. Braden (page 52) defines belief: "that it's the acceptance that comes from what we think is true in our minds married with what we feel is true in our hearts." Braden (page 53) writes: "Belief is our acceptance of what we have witnessed, experienced, or know for ourselves." So there can be wrong beliefs when our reason is not in balance with our emotion, and so to arrive at something self evident (as Braden requires) involves an innate error recognition. It is this way that belief can be tuned with the universal, but this requires discipline. Braden (page 59) writes: "the universal experience that we know as feeling and belief are the names that we give to the body's ability to convert our experiences into electrical and magnetic waves." Braden (page 74) writes: "Simply hoping, wishing, or saying that a healing is successful may have little effect upon the actual situation. In these experiences, we haven't yet arrived at the belief -the certainty that comes from acceptance of what we think is true, coupled with what we feel is true in our body- that makes the wish a reality." ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 773-775 775 Smith, S. P. Review of Gregg Braden's Book: The Spontaneous Healing of Belief: Shattering the Paradigm of False Limits In is interesting that Braden sees reality as a computer simulation, and it comes with belief codes that act as part of the universal computer program. This admission would seem to delight materialists and science fiction writers that venture similar speculations. But Braden's usage is metaphorical, and there is a serious caveat that permits a break from a mechanistic world view: we are able to reprogram our poorly tuned beliefs, because instinctively we know that the simulation is only an illusion. Because we know that an appearance is an illusion we are able to escape the dictates of a computer program, and therefore greater reality cannot be just a simulation. Braden (page 137) writes that, "while our bodies are certainly in this world, the living force that expresses itself through them is actually based somewhere else, as the larger reality that we just can't see from our vantage point." Braden gives us many helpful hints on how to re-program our beliefs. Braden (page 159) writes: "To make a change in something as powerful as the core beliefs that define our lives, we need a trigger that's equally powerful. We need a reason to jolt us from complacency of one way of thinking into a new, and sometimes revolutionary, way of seeing things." Because we can break away from the output of a mere computer simulation, Braden's big reality involves a spiritual realm that rediscovers the wisdom of Buddha and Jesus. Braden (page 199) writes: "Jesus taught that we must become in life the very things that we choose to experience in the world." This corresponds to Braden's belief code number 27, and by now I hope you feel the jolt of this remarkable book. References Gregg Braden, 2008, The Spontaneous Healing of Belief: Shattering the Paradigm of False Limits, Hay House. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 216-217 Cecil, M. Response to Tony Bermanseder’s Commentary on “Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness” 216 Response to Commentary Response to Tony Bermanseder’s Commentary on “Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness” Michael Cecil* ABSTRACT This is my Response to Tony Bermanseder‟s Commentary on my essay “Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness” that appears in this issue. Key Words: thinker, thought, self, consciousness, movement, self-reflection. First, there is no such thing as a „thinking process‟. Such a term consists of a fundamental violation of Occam‟s Razor. In other words, there is no „thinker‟ and no verb “to think”. And, to assert that there is a „thinking process‟ is to assert that thought is the fundamental datum of human experience. It isn‟t. The „movement‟ of self-reflection is the fundamental datum of human experience since it gives rise to the consciousness of the “self” which exists prior to the consciousness of the „thinker‟ and the existence of thoughts. And, for similar reasons, there is no such thing as a „mind‟. In other words, the „mind‟, as a concept, is similar to the “ether” of classical physics. What I have written is not precisely a „theory‟ of consciousness but a description of an observation of consciousness. It is no „theory‟, for example, that there are three states of matter for H20. Steam, water and ice can all be directly observed; similarly for the three dimensions of consciousness. This is not a matter for agreement or disagreement. This is a matter of either observing or not observing the reality of consciousness. Second, non-existence cannot become “self-aware” of its “non-existence as an eternity and a nothingness”; nor can it „create itself as a Unity‟. Self-awareness originates in self-reflection; self-reflection fractures the Unity into a „spatial‟ consciousness of a “self”/“not self”. That is the inescapable duality. In addition, the term “eternity” implies time. But time is thought and thought perpetuates duality (see Krishnamurti). The term “non-temporal” does not mean “eternal”. It indicates that the entire concept of time simply cannot be applied to that dimension of consciousness. The word “DEFINITION” implies thought and duality. But, prior to thought and duality, there is observation; first of the „movement‟ of self-reflection, then the „movement‟ of thought. In other words, thought and definition are not primary. Finally, my “rejection of the scientific approach” is not based upon any „presumption‟. That is, both the scientific approach itself and any „presumption‟ originate in thought. And what I am describing here, once again, is an observation rather than any thought. To point out that the „thinker‟ perpetuates the duality originating in the „movement‟ of self-reflection is not to „belittle or denigrate the Creation itself‟. In fact, it is precisely the opposite. That is, the Creation is a Unity. It is the „movement‟ of self-reflection which, by fragmenting that Unity into a duality, is the source of division, conflict, violence and, even plausibly, a civilizationannihilating genocide. (For readers interested in the interpretations of scriptures and antiquity, please see my further response in the Note below) Correspondence: Michael Cecil, http://science-of-consciousness.blogspot.com E-mail: mececil@sbcglobal.net ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 216-217 Cecil, M. Response to Tony Bermanseder’s Commentary on “Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness” 217 Note: First, no person can be “rather familiar” with the Revelation of John. One has either received or not received the Vision of the “Son of man” and the Revelation of the “resurrection”; Revelations which are crucial to the understanding of that Revelation. Second, there is no such thing as the “visions of knowledge”. This Revelation only occurs in the singular as the “Vision of the Son of man”. And such a speculation demonstrates the lack of Knowledge of such a Vision. Even worse, I have never used the term „vision of the resurrection‟. The term is “Revelation of the resurrection”, which consists of the Revelation of the Memory of Creation and the revelation of the memories of previous lives. This Vision and this Revelation cannot be described as any „individuated messages from the subconscious‟. They are Revelations received from God, pure and simple. And such a speculation (or conjecture) can be made only by someone who has not received those specific Revelations. (As stated in the Quran: “Conjecture is no substitute for the Truth.”) Third, self-reflection occurs in bi-directional time. This gives rise to the “self”/“not self”. Words cannot go backwards in time prior to bi-directional time; which means, in essence, that very, very few statements can be made about the Creator at all other than statements which have been specifically Revealed. That is the purpose of Revelation, the “flame of a flashing sword” guarding the “Tree of Life” (Genesis 3:24) and preventing any approach by either a consciousness of a “self” OR a consciousness of a „thinker‟. Fourth, the “mishmash of scriptural archetypes” have not been “thrown together”. Those words are immediately observed/perceived as pertaining to parallel dimensions of consciousness. Nor is there any more of an “individuated agenda” here than there was with Einstein‟s Special Theory of Relativity. If such things cannot be observed, they cannot be observed. But that does not mean that they originate in the thoughts of either a “self” or a „thinker‟. Nor were those words written for the purpose of „supporting premises‟ or „scriptural evidence‟. In other words, there is no „argument to a conclusion‟ here; just as there is no logical sequence in which a person either observes the Mona Lisa or listens to Beethoven‟s Fifth Symphony to appreciate its beauty. These words are, again, the description of an experience of Revelation rather than thoughts originating in the consciousness of the “self‟ or the „thinker‟. Fifth, the term “alternative interpretation” implies thought. What I have written is not an interpretation in the first place, not having originated in thought. Thus, there is not any “alternative interpretation”. There is, first of all, a description of the Revelation; and there is, secondly, an interpretation of that description by either the consciousness of the “self” or the consciousness of the „thinker‟; both of which, however, originate in duality: Sixth, the “fig leaves” are, as a symbol, at precisely the opposite end of the spectrum from the “Tree of Life”. The “fig leaves” are the thoughts of the „thinker‟, whose purpose is to maintain the temporal continuity of the “self” as the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil”. (This is the significance of Saying #37 in the Gospel of Thomas.) The “Tree of Life”, however, is a symbol for the Vision of the “Son of man”, the Knowledge of which is not the human, dualistic, thoughts of the „fallen‟ consciousness of either the “self” or the „thinker‟. Finally, the “beast of the sea” and the “beast of the earth” are, as symbols, precisely at the opposite end of the spectrum from the „angel who puts his right foot on the sea and his left foot upon the land‟ (the sequence is significant—although Mr. Bermanseder, not surprisingly, reverses the sequence); which is another symbol for the Vision of the “Son of man”. In addition, the “two witnesses” of Chapter 11 of the Revelation of John are the ida and pingala of kundalini (also echoed in Chapter 4 of the Book of Zechariah). (This Knowledge is conveyed through the Vision of the “Son of man” itself—which is also symbolized by the crucifixion of Jesus “between two thieves at the place of the skull”, as well as by the caduceus of Greek mythology—and cannot be apprehended by the „fallen‟, dualistic consciousness of the “self” or the „thinker‟.) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 5 Article Inaugural Issue Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness: How Time and Space Conception of Idealistic Philosophy Is Supported by Contemporary Physics Dainis Zeps* ABSTRACT May we imagine that materialistic and idealistic thinkers were both right in all point concerning mind and matter they have quarreled for centuries? May we imagine that in quarrel for primacy between matter and mind both claims for primacy are right and only our good will is required to accept that ultimate reconciliation? May we imagine that all thinking activity of all men on earth and elsewhere is one collective movement being seen and still in progress from our side and essentially one from the side of the universe? It is only point of good will not of reasoning itself. Neither contemporary physics is about to deny it but rather support. Key Words: cognitum, consciousness, time, space, materialistic, idealistic. 1. Introduction Since past, philosophers, mostly those identified as idealistic, thinking about relationship between mind and objective world in sense what to put first, mind or objectivity, gave preference to the first. And ever since an idea have been present and procured by some of notion, them that they shouldn't be divided but actually taken as one common where it falls into two notions because of our under-standing, or rather not understanding, of the world we live in. The idea of mind as something outside a man or brain has been present in thoughts of highest minds in different way. In Plato, soul encompasses the whole universe in Timaios. In Plotin, the notion of One that is tot of all that encompasses mind and reality in the indivisible union, the One. Many medieval theologians, e. g. Hugo de Sancto Victore, shared this view similar to Plato and/or Plotin. Common soul idea's supporter was Siger of Brabant. Starting from Berkeley (1710) a new insight, with a critical appearance, of the idea where materialistic world properly should be placed was commenced. Berkley, developed by Kant (1781), developed by Ouspensky (1911), express one idea: we are not seeing with eyes but with mind, or, what really matters for scientific goal, is what we see with mind, with whatever possible effort trying to exclude all that where we are deceived with our visional eye. Time and space ceases to belong to objectivity as by materialists but become constructs of mind. Correspondence: Dainis Zeps, Ph.D., Senior Researcher, Institute of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Latvia, Riga, Rainis av., 29, Latvia, LV - 1459. E-mail: dainize@mii.lu.lv Note: This work was completed in July, 2005. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 6 Ouspensky raises argument, that physics is not possible to give adequate picture of reality because of its impossibility to abstract itself from time and space notions as it would require idealistic philosophy. Ouspensky died in 1947, only few years before Bell's theorem came into being. We ask now, can not actually contemporary physics support views of idealistic philosophers, expressed in the following points: 1) The mind and the objective world is the same or, at least, by no way can be separated one from another; 2) Space and time, actually being constructs of mind, are more psychological notions than physical or, at least, by no discernable way can be classified as distinctly belonging to one or another; 3) We see only with the mind, visional seeing being for scientific inquire far too deceiving, i.e. visional seeing in no way may be used as instrument for scientific inquire; and 4) Universe globally is alive even if life forms eventually may as if originate from “nonalive” matter if considered immoderately locally. 2. Peter Ouspensky and His Worlds Further we are going to interpret one particular scientist of the first half of 20th century Peter Ouspensky. He names his first mostly significant work "Tertium organum" (1911) after Aristotle (Organon) and Beckon (New organon) by this expressing his claim to be some manifestant of all ideas of idealistic philosophy. Due to fact that Ouspensky himself did not recognize physics as being possible to solve main mysteries of human existence, he is generally considered as mystic, but here we are about to ignore this fact and going to interpret him just in light of physics. Ouspensky's some points are essential for us already here, and they should supplement the list of requirements for contemporary physics: 5) Science is ready to comprehend only very small portion of the reality and only phenomenal part of it, its numinal [i.e. hidden in unrecognized dimensions or elsewhere] part remaining completely hidden or obscure for it; and 6) Time has three dimensions e.g. spiral movement encompassing the idea, or, at least, time in no way is as simple as being one dimensional. Further ideas of Ouspensky used in this article are connected with his higher worlds, the idea itself being used by many mystical teachings. We are going to untangle these ideas for positivistic scientific inquiry. Let us summarize the idea in a shape we are going to use it. The names of these worlds we take from Ouspensky, but they are not relevant for us for the moment, and further we try to give general idea about them too. Further goes Ouspensky (1934). There is hierarchy of eight [or seven] worlds: 0) absolute; 1) all worlds; 2) all stars; 3) sun; 4) planets; 5) earth; 6) lunar; 7) absolute. Each world has its own three rules and inherited rules from other (more outward) worlds where the particular world is nested in. Absolute has one rule but it is not counted in [maybe must?] as inherited by other worlds. Thus we get the following distribution of rules through worlds: absolute – 1; all worlds – 3; all stars – 6; sun – 12; planets – 24; earth – 48; lunar – 96. We live in sublunar world and have 96 rules. If we had lived e.g. on sun, we had had only 12 rules, i.e. some higher existence but hot one, how it looks from part where we live in. The essential fact is that our world has 3 own rules, and 93 inherited rules with the following distribution of theses rules ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 7 through inherited worlds: 30 + 481 + 242 + 123 + 64 + 35 = 96, where superscripts stand for order of inheritance (nestedness in). Thus, basic rules that guide all our world are from different worlds, and not accounting for this fact our description of the world is very complicated but merely due to fact that we do not know how to use the hierarchic structure of our world into higher worlds. There are two general rules, the rule of three principles or three forces and the rule of seven or the octave of musical sounds. These rules were/are applied by getting hierarchy of the worlds. By using the law of seven or the law of octave each world may be associated with one musical note with two slowdowns between notes mi and fa, and si and do correspondingly. According mystical teachings we live in the area of slowdown between notes mi and fa. Besides, Ouspensky uses notion of the ray of creation, according which worlds are being created hierarchically starting from absolute and so on. Human being lives within this ray of creation and becomes conscious by being nested in 0) absolute, 1) galaxies, 2) Milky Way, 3) Sun, 4) Solar system, 5) Earth, 6) organic life, 7) self, or human being itself. 3. Ouspensky's Unknown ‘Teaching of Old’ All his life Ouspensky (1949) was striving for the forgotten knowledge of the past. The knowledge he left behind himself he attributed to what he called 'forgotten knowledge'. But let us assume for a moment that he was right, at least in some points, and let us try to guess meaning of some aspects of these teachings. For example, what could correspond to his “worlds” and their hierarchy? Let us develop some simple idea. We might imagine that our far distant in the time ancients did know physics which were organized hierarchically: let us for a while suppose they knew how to develop their physical science in some hierarchical way that every level of hierarchy had their own proper triad of principles. If so, physics were hierarchically organized and could be organized within its description hierarchically corresponding to its complexity, i.e. there were levels with all mathematical complexity, and above these levels, were levels with symbolic and conceptual description, and above all, very simple level with symbolic description which concealed lower complex levels, but it were nevertheless precise picture of nature and reality. This outer level could be as simple as being possible to be taught and interpreted for, say, children in schools. Every more complex level came when previous were captured. Thus people possibly were educated in this far distant past. In this higher symbolic level physical things might have been designated with some symbolic names, say, worlds, suns, planets, etc. Four principles of knowledge earth, fire, ear and water may have been such descriptive symbols with some deeper meaning in their proper background. For us these symbols, after tremendous historical memory loss, came as manifestants of as if very low level of our ancients’ understanding of reality. Truly, what did Plato knew? 4. Main Idea of This Work 4.1 Motivation Let all what positivistic science tells about matter and our universe and how it came into being via BB be taken as truth; even though changing, but changing because developing. With latest developments of theoretical physics, modern physical science claims for being possible to describe whole universe with simple but powerful equations getting near the grand unification of main physical forces in nature, the dream of Einstein. Standard model of ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 8 elementary particle physics developed in superstring theory thus becoming capable to describe gravitational forces too getting its today appearance in inflational universe theory more than ever able to describe observable reality makes today’s physics a forerunner of all other objective sciences only hoping for similar success. But this all concerns positivistic science. How to reconcile it with some scientific insight that maybe wants to share views of philosophers of past hitherto qualified as idealistic? If I am positivist myself, then all is but say farewells to scientists of old times and say that their time is out. Thanks to Berkeley for him allowing the table to be where it is at least for a while whilst I or he was looking to it! Thanks to Kant for rescuing objectivity via transcendentality! Thank for enjoying us all of you; it was real fun to live with you in one world! But now times have changed and only objective science may be called science, other being relicts of past and not any more enjoying but rather getting on our nerves or even peeving us for not knowing their time and place. But let us try to think otherwise: at least for a while reading these lines. Let us not say that only positivistic science knows truth, let us admit that not all we know not even a greater part, let for a moment imagine that what we know actually is very small even incredible small portion of all what we could know. Let us imagine being positivists too but of 11th millennium. What proportion of knowledge would be that we know already today? One percent? But maybe millesimal of one percent? It would be more credible. Let us imagine that this estimate concerns physics too even that of inflational universe, superstring theories or M-theory. It doesn't work? But let us try! But if I am not simple positivist but such who has learned to be sometimes positivist but sometimes idealist? Am I not scientist? Am I not consequent in my thinking? Am I lying to myself? But what if I have learned how to be in both positions, both positivistic and idealistic? What if I have found some people who have had that faculty too? What if I have exercised special way of thinking to get such faculty, what if I have spend years for this aim, in my own way and with help of others? What if I have learned myself together with Teihard de Chardin (1965)? together with Ouspensky? What if I have found out that people of past shared maybe this trend too, say, Plato? Now we come to main point of our task, to say, what we are going to do in order to make some common garden for both materialists and idealists. Their main quarrel was around mind and matter how to subordinate them one to other. What we do actually in this article, we unite them and show that both sides may be reconciled around this. For positivists we must show that they loose nothing but further even get, but for idealists we give world to live in what have already belonged to them from the dim and distant past. 4.2 Main Item How to unite mind and matter? At first, beginning with, we do the simplest thing: we equate them. The only reasonable way to do it when applying both notions to all universe or even all universes or all existence, saying, that we do not try to detach them on these highest levels of comprehension and thus they may be pro tempore equated or at least until the idea is exhausted. Idea of equation of mind with existence has been present always in philosophy. For us, one of best example is that of Descartes cogito ergo sum, which words better of all expresses the idea of thinking being equated with existence. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 9 Let us start with some definitions. We enter a notion of cognitum1 what should denote universal ratio in universe. We are going to say that cognitum is a consciousness of the universe. Besides, we use the new term cognitum in order to endow it with other meanings too. The main statement of our attitude would be that we identify consciousness of universe with universe itself. Thus, in our approach matter and consciousness are not the same if taken only as some parts of them but they may be identified if taken in Toto. Thus, we call cognitum that common notion that stands both for mind and universe. Thus, by definition both notions are united. But, is it so unimaginable to come to this understanding via some scientific or positivistic cognition? Since we know Bell's theorem, universe is not anymore thinkable consisting of enormous amount of particles where, symbolically, one particle does not know what occurs with other. The universe is connected via some universal informational media 'that knows all', i.e. each particle 'knows' what may occur with any other particle in the universe. Best it came expressed in string theory, where matter appeared into being as vibrations, and this media was the string itself. If matter is now consistent of vibrations, then particles of course too and two distinct vibrations of course know one about other even if they are in superposition what means actually their greatest and ultimate independence. Whole music on strings are played according some plan [implicit order of David Bohm (2002)] of all universe otherwise it would be as if matter is falling out of without somewhere universe realizing about it; and superposition is that grand principle which says that all that together consist [and live too] of whatever parts in hierarchy until inferior stock where particles live until still lower stock where quarks live until still lower stock where only information live, and all that not only consist with one in another but rather live, or read, are ruled with general rules of nature. In M-theory we speak about branes where our entire universe may be imagined as a single brane in 11 dimensional space. But brane, as positivists should state, is only mathematical notion, it may consist of as many branes in superposition in as many subsets of matter may be imagined in universe. One, two, three particles, quarks, elementary particles or whatever else clumps of matter taking separately form their own brane. Even more. Following idea of Feynman, as long as quantum mechanics laws work, taking a history in time [from state to state] of a sufficiently small particle, it coexists with all other possible histories, which are all possible ways of reaching second state from the first. Take these other histories as parallel universes or take as non-realized these histories which were not cached by 'eye' of experiment but in no way ignore them otherwise Heisenberg uncertainty principle would break down and with it quantum world laws and with it whole universe. Thus in quantum distances universe works with incredible precision where reality can not be distinguished from some as if computational process what is emulated on superstrings, i.e. branes. On the other hand, approximation of a solution made by human being as thought in classical physics, in quantum era becomes ontological approximation or solution which itself lives somewhere in the ocean of all possible branes. This statement is best explained in Max Tegmark (2003). 1 Cognitum is Latin form, i.e. supine, of verb cognosco =I exercise thinking, become aware of things. This verb is derived from cogito = I think. Descart's words cogito ergo sum mean I think and therefore I am. With this word is connected Greek ISSN: = I know, and =cognition. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 10 Thus, cognitum hypothesis states that it is not decidable between universe and mind assuming that at quantum distances there is not decidable between the physical quantum event and the computable event. We associate cognitum hypothesis with, what we call, cognitum consciousness combining this with general idea that applying cognitum idea systematically we might reach some benefits. As soon as cognitum hypothesis is proved inconsistent, or cognitum consciousness ceases to be profitable, both should be denounced. 4.3. Eventual Usefulness of the Idea of Cognitum Development of contemporary physics show that only mind gives contribution to its development. Let us explain this statement. What we used to think before, that investigation of objective world, what appears before us through our senses, gives us rise of understanding of the world manifested in physical science, now more and more are affected with understanding that with departing from sensible world we reach deeper and deeper understanding of nature. We have two reliable physical theories: quantum theory or theory of something incredible small and general relativity or science of something incredible large, i.e. within just these scopes where we do not live in; the scope of our senses turned out to be deceivable: they do not give us physical theories. But we have not got lesson from this: we try to combine our understanding of the world around us with time and space notions, most deceiving things for physical theories. But these extremal theories, KM and GR, show us not coincidence but a rule. Only where our mind works without impact of our other senses we start to reach results. Where time and space cease to work in usual way, but quantum rules start to work, we come to physics where we may prove theorems, even as incredible for classical physics as Bell's theorem. In quantum world only our mind works, no senses of ours may give something useful. A different question is that of physical experiment and its role in physical science and what we 'see' with the 'eyes' of instruments, or they must be treated as tentacles of our mind, must be discussed separately. [In support of the second, it fits to take into account how long we must fumble about until we build suitable experiment, the process of which itself showing us that merely seeing with eyes here gives almost nothing in comparing with that of mind’s advantages, and eye’s vision is more obstructive than useful. In experiment, our mind recreates conditions where our theoretical solutions are verified, but the process of this resembles more fumbling in obscurity than clear seeing. What kind of seeing is actually required in the process of the building of physical experiment and from this our physical experience, that is of seeing with mind.] 4.4 Cognitum Hypothesis and Thinking Let us put a very general question, why we are thinking, i.e. where from comes this ability of our’s? The mostly common answer on such a question would be: because we are highest developed creatures in universe which have gained this possibility in evolution or received it or were endowed with it in some or other way, say, from above, from God, what some religious traditions would suggest. But now, we put to question this argument, asking, why or what for something (or someone) in the universe should endow us with the possibility to think? ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 11 We are used to think: if we have something, then someone or something gave it. Similarly with our capability to think we think that someone gave it us. But can we imagine that nobody gave it us, but it already existed in universe. Even more, actually we do not know, what the thing or concept what we call thinking actually is, except, that this is some higher movement in universe and we are sensitive to this movement and can touch, with our cognition tools, this 'something' and thus be sensitive to this movement. Why or what for this movement called thinking exist in universe, we can not ask because it is higher that us. And finally, we are not highest being in universe, but quite contrary: we are the lowest creatures yet being endowed with possibility to think. Animals reach this possibility of 'thinking' only on level of their functionality of their bodies, plants – on the level for their growing, mineral world – on the level of possession of their physical properties, e.a. Thus, cognitum is that base level of thinking, highest or lowest or both in the union, us being on some (hopeably) rather high hierarchical stock, where thinking still reaches us in that functionality we possess. We enjoy this given us functionality highly enough even to the level that we announce us the rulers of the reason and the intellect and the mind. Not bad, not bad at all for the beginning! 4.5 Thinking and Ray of Creation Further we take something more from Ouspensky. We are about to make radical assumptions about what concerns our thinking. See Schopenhauer (1851) too. What we are about can be expressed simply: we unify three notions in one i.e. time, thinking and creation, and we say: there is only one movement responsible for all three. As long as we have not studied in what relation these three notions we are used to are in connection with this one movement we say that there is no great advantage in trying to separate them. Thus pro tempore, we have this one movement, what we call, pro tempore, using Latin word, visum or Greek word theorema2, i.e. vision, or what can be seen. Let us justify our choices and our definitions: from point of view of cognitum:
(creation): we are reached with the movement that creates us, or we come into being via this movement of theorema in sense of creation;
(thinking): in the same time on our cognitive level we become aware of being capable of what we call thinking, but it is the level of creativity of cognitum that endow us with power of theorema but in sense of thinking; and
(time): and, at last, all this occurs not in time, but time is within this process, and not having option to be more explicit, we are forced take this same movement for time, and say that we live within theorema in the sense of time too. Thus, our model of universe may be expressed very simply: there is cognitum in process of theorema, i.e. it looks on itself, examines itself, and we are aware of this examination on our level of existence, on human being's level. Cognitum via theorema sees itself, and we become aware of this as being the level created by cognitum what we in simplest manifestation reveal as time and recognize as thinking ability, other senses becoming companions of this. Cogito ergo sum says much of this same. In other words, the notions creation, time, and thinking (of the universe) is one and the same thing, , i.e. from outside or the side of the universe, it being alive, universe 2 Visum is Latin form, i.e. supine, of verb video = I see. Closest Greek words are = I see, comprehend, and = I view, inspect, examine. Noun has several meanings, but one is observation, but in general exercise the power of cognition. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 12 starts with Big Bang with (about) eight big discernable levels, but from inside, or, from side of human being, what concerns creation of universe, i.e. BB, to it correspond creation of human being, with eight discernable levels, which Ouspensky calls worlds. 4.6 Idea of One Universal Man Idea of one universal man has been present in philosophy always but in quite different appearances. Only few traditions, e.g. Indians, use this word openly, namely, universal man. More widely we know notions of common soul, One of Plotin, common subconsciousness of Karl Jung, e.a. These views may seem quite different, but nevertheless they use common idea that we, human beings, are not separated one from another. But what we are looking for is a man as process of its creation and from the view of cognitum. For our purpose we need only to be aware of some aspects of all creational process, and one of it is our multiplication, how it takes place, how from the universal man, that is one, we, that are many, come into being. Let us assume that the creational process does it, but for us being essential only fact that on level of higher world there is only one man, i.e. universal man, in the world we live in, i.e. in sublunar world, there are as many men as they are in actual reality. Maybe one more fact [from Ouspensky] we might suggest to use: before slowdown between musical notes si and do, i.e. between absolute and all worlds, there is one man, and already after second slowdown between musical notes mi and fa, i.e. between planets and earth, there are as many as actually men we perceive. Finally, for the purpose of this article where only physical theories we are interested in, only two questions, and particularly this question of multiplicity of human beings and similarly all his ontological life, has some importance for us. The second is about our time we experience as part of our life. What concerns physics, we assume that after second slowdown, i.e. between mi and fa, time already exists as we experience it. But on level of first slowdown there must exist another time of which we may say next to nothing. Maybe ? 4.7 Is Physics of Life Necessary? We could ask where in our physical world we could put Ouspensky's many worlds, ray of creation, how to use law of musical octave outside music itself, i.e. in physics, where to put his theory on higher hydrogen? Should there be assumed necessity for another physics? maybe called physics of life? In our approach of reality we assume that there could be pro tempore useful notion of another physics which we could call physics of life. This new physics should be very distant from the traditional physics, that eventually maybe could be developed, after many years, from positivistic physics, but what is not possible now because of our weak understanding of the life (as state of being alive) itself. One more aspect may add to necessity of such temporal situation, and that is due to our weak understanding of the true nature of time and space. Even more, contemporary physics shows very weak readiness to change these notions or try to develop something without space and time. We are too closely connected to the notion of movement. We can't think anything without movement. Why Parmenides could? He said nothing? We do not have that knowledge of his. 4.8 Cognitum Hypothesis and Time and Space Elimination from Inevitable Objectivity Let us return to traditional physics and consider whole universe and its history as a single brane from the moment of its birth, i.e. Big Bang, until its complete collapse, big 'ping' ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 13 or 'crunch' how we could call it. What is before the birth of the universe? There are several approaches about this, and one of them says that the state before may be characterized as unstable. To leave this state of instability, universe must enter some more stable state, and this occurs through Big Bang. Of course, every physicist can see that this story of change from unstable state to stable may be taken as acceptable only because of no better story. E.g., better story maybe could be that before singularity there another history of universe might be, and so on. Let us discuss story about unstable state before BB. We suggest better story. Both states should be accepted as possible but only with one assumption that that state what we called 'before Big Bang' actually is quite similar universe to our but without time and space, that it is some eventual space with all ready for it to explode, but nothing occurring in it, because of a simple reason, ... that we do not live in it, i.e., time and space is not because of us not being there. This universe which is unreachable from us is more symmetric, all dimensions are incredible small, or big? we do not have with what anything may be compared, and more likeable, because of symmetry. Actually, we can not say anything about that universe without us whether it is exploded or not, because this observation is possible only in our universe where we observe expansion of our universe what is the same movement what we called theorema. From traditional physics this expansion is physical time plus space expansion, for physics of life it is theorema. 4.9 Cognitum Hypothesis and What We Are Researching? When we come to understanding that whole universe, and what he does, may be considered as Someone that thinks endowed with the only his activity, thinking, we actually come to understand that what we are examining, it is our brain or our cognitive ability. This fact may cause us to fall in desperation about usefulness [or no usefulness] of our inquiring about reality. But this desperate state must not rule over us for a long time because next thought could be that we are on a right way, because if only one man is there in the world then there doesn't much matter whether we investigate our brain or universe in the whole, because both things are not distinguishable. More deeply, this idea says us about the nature of the objectivity where it arises from. In case of many human beings there couldn’t be only one common reality. 4.10 Cognitum Hypothesis and Universe as a Thinking Machine Next thing we are to recognize is that what we found previously about hierarchy of worlds, that this is the structure of our thinking or some sort of thinking machine that our cognitive capacity uses to reveal reality. This machine researches reality, and on some level we come to recognize the machine itself what comes before us as some part of our universe or even whole universe. Further on, we come to realize that we are on right way on search of ultimate reality. We might call this machine Ouspensky’s machine. 4.11 Ouspensky’s Machine and Languages Structure of Ouspensky machine shows that it could be very good suited for language investigations and their possible origin. Four levels between and two times: forward! Language machines may be very useful for us because they are those that are given us by cognitum gratis; we are not those who have much taken pains to reach these capabilities. This may explain Benjamin Lee Whorf's question what asked why Einstein and beggar use ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 14 the same language capability (1975). With language we get more developed thinking tool than that what we develop ourselves. 4.12 Ouspensky’s Machine and Different Levels of Scientific Thinking Ouspensky’s machine could be some accessible level for man what reaching he or she could think more effectively than ordinary man who has not developed his or her thinking capability. Is it highest level? Is it in connection in some way with ? Who knows! 5. Cognitum Consciousness and Its Eventual Fruitfulness 5.1 Solving Problems of Idealistic Philosophy Ouspensky was not right only in one point – that physics can not explain statements of idealistic philosophy. Quite contrary, it must be just physics what should make all statements come in one beautiful model, model of universe. In such eventually predictable model, time and space should be as physical as physicists would like to see them and as psychological as idealistic philosophers, say, Kant and Ouspensky, would like to apprehend them. Ouspensky could not accept idea that mind is outside the man and in the same time to be in all and everywhere. Cognitum idea is on right way to solve this and to do this subtle job with hands of physicists. Cognitum hypothesis now solves the problem with seeing. Newton and Berkeley at last may shake hands both having been right. Actually, their quarrel was around absolute time suggested by Newton, not being acceptable for Berkeley. But no problem more with them or between them, because they both were as if looking on one notion – time, but being too far one from other in cognitive sense. Newton would be angry with the idea of the time arising from nowhere, from state of instability, but he had not a slightest idea about sleeping universe without time at all (or time ‘sleeping’ in it). Berkeley could not bear idea of time being before creation and he was right. 5.2 Materialism and Idealism, Positivism and Subjectivity Physics may cease to choose between positivism and not positivism, even, between materialism and idealism. Cognitum hypothesis, of course, firstly is more like to idealistic conception, but getting deeper in the idea, we should understand that physical view doesn't suffer in any place or point, and actually, if we consider physics as materialistic science, even with all superstrings and possible braids or whatever might come in the future, then cognitum hypothesis doesn't make any unbearable impact on materialism except forcing it to live in neighbourhood with idealism. They were at war, but they may be at peace – that is all the difference. There is one interesting point concerning Kant and his idea of the res in se, i.e. that we can not get inside (or outside) things, res in se should always remain unreachable by our mind and tools of investigation. Pondering about cognitum in positivistic sense, one might say, maybe actually matter is somewhere outside cognitum, and not reachable by physics, similarly as Kant was pondering. Subjectivity touches positivism only in one point, but if positivists could bear that their state of instability exists always, no only before big band, then they may say that eight worlds of creation of a man are too far from them to bother about them. But maybe they might become interested with the idea that life proves to be in reachability of physics, which always was considered as biggest mystery of scientific thought. Can or not cognitum consciousness give something more than merely idea of universe being alive is another thing, but we now have at least one touching point. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 05-15 Zeps, D. Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness 15 Even birth and death come now into one and the same world, except this only thing that materialistic thinking must get accustomed to – that of existence of one universal man. But in the model of universe even this point is without any discernable consequence, because every one can consider himself or herself as he or she being this universe man [or woman], and the model of universe should work as beautiful as with the universal man [or woman?]. References Berkeley, George. Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge, 1710. David Bohm. Wholeness and the Implicate Order, Routledge, London, 2002. Davies, P.C.W. Multiverse Cosmological Models. Australian Centre for Astrobiology, Macquarie University. Diogenes, Laertius. Vitae philosophorum: . Gibbs, Philip. Event-Symmetric Space-Time. 1998. www.weburbia.com/press/esst.htm Guth, Alan H. Kaiser, David I. Inflationary Cosmology: Exploring the Universe from the Smallest to the Largest Scales. Science. Vol. 307, febr. 2005, pp. 884-890. . in Latin. Patrologia Latina, Vol. Hugo de Sancto Victore. Kant, Emanuel. Kritik der reinen Vernunft, 1781. Mosterin, Jesus. Anthropic Explanations in Cosmology. pp. 42. Ouspensky, Peter. Tertium Organum. Key to Solving Mysteries of the World. In Russian. 1911. Ouspensky, Peter. New Model of Universe. Ouspensky, Peter. In Search of Miraculous, 1949. Ouspensky, Peter. The Model of New Psychology. The Model of New Cosmology,1934. Plato, . Prideaux, Jeff. Comparison between Karl Pribram's "Holographic Brain Theory" and more conventional models of neuronal computation. Rashewsky, Peter. Rieman Geometry and Tensor Analysis. in Russian. 1967. Schiller, Christoph. Motion Mountain. A hike through and beyond space and time following the concepts of modern physics. www.motionmontain.net Schopenhauer, Arthur. Aphorismen zur Lebensweisheit, 1851. Smythies, John. Space, Time and Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10, No. 3, 2003, pp. 47-56. Swedenborg & The Holographic Paradigm. Swedenborg, Emanuel. Divine Love and Wisdom. Tegmark, Max. Parallel Universes. Scientific American (May 2003), pp. 30-41. Tegmark, Max. Parallel Universes. Science and Ultimate Reality: From Quantum to Cosmos, honouring John Wheeler's 90th birthday, J.D. Barrow, P.C.W. Davies, & C.L. Harper eds., Cambridge University Press (2003). Teihard de Chardin, P. The Phenomenon of man. N.Y. 1965. Wertheimer, Max. Productive Thinking. Harper & Brothers Publishers N.Y. Williams, Alan T. Consciousness, Physics and the Holographic Paradigm. Whorf, Benjamin Lee. Language, Mind, and Reality, 1975. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 729 [Note: Late addition essay meant for focus issue 1(5), Time & Consciousness: Two Faces of One Mystery?] Exploration ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) Peter Beamish* Abstract: Here is described a second form of time. Here, it is also suggested that ‗ALL (real) TIME IS NOW TIME,‘ otherwise past and future temporal concepts of the two types are scalar labels called ‗Conventional timetags‘ and ‗Rhythmic Timetags.‘ Additionally one‘s mind is described by a new, seemingly important, dynamic concept called an ‗Essos‘ (pronounced Eee-sos) and containing both one‘s ‗Conventional Now‘ and one‘s ‗Rhythm Based Now.‘ It is suggested that we use an upper case ‗TIME‘ for the sum of these two mental concepts. Described also is the seemingly very important ‗Mental Vector Process‘ or ‗MVP‘ which appears as the Most Valuable Player, for all living organisms, in The Game of Life. The book preparation, entitled Dancing With Nature, from which this paper is a highly edited form, suggests the merging of the science of physics with the sciences of biophysics and biochemistry. Key Words: Conventional time t, Rhythm Based Time T, TIME or (t + T), timetag, Timetag, mind, Essos, Now, MVP, biophysics. Introduction ‗Conventional time t‘ is displacement divided by velocity, or space divided by speed. Throughout this research we use both an internal upper case ‗T‘ and closed words (such as ‗onTime‘) to designate a newly discovered temporal form called ‗Rhythmic Time‘ or ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT.‘ Such ‗Rhythmic Time‘ is defined by: ―a mental perception of lateness relative to an agreed, biophysical, cyclical concept of synchronizaTion (or onTimeness) between two or more minds.‖ ‗Conventional time‘ is well known to physics. ―Rhythm Based Time‖ is both biophysics and a foundation of a newly discovered ‗Rhythm Based Communication, RBC,‘ which has now been studied between humans and ‗The Great Whales,‘ eagles, moose, fox and other unstressed animals. Such is explained in a book entitled Dancing With Whales (Creative Publishers, St. John‘s, NL, CA) and is soon to be presented with much more detail, and data, in a sequel Dancing With Nature. We hereby join this latter research story (methods, materials and results) with ocean expeditions from Trinity, Newfoundland, aboard the Ceres, a large rigid-hulled inflatable with hull mounted underwater transmitters. Samples from Dancing With Nature (adventure plus new knowledge) ―T minus one minute and counting. Gentlemen please place your chair backs and tabletops in the upright position for takeoff! A-OK Nick, castaway. T minus zero. Up slow to half speed.‖ * Correspondence: Peter Beamish, Ocean Contact, Ltd. & Ceta Research, Inc. Box 10, Trinity, NF, AOC2SO, Canada. Phone: 1-709-464-3990 or 1-709-464-3269. Email: beamish@oceancontact.com Web: http://www.oceancontact.com/ (Dancing with Whales, the full-length book, can be ordered from this site.) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 730 ―What was that upright stuff?‖ asks Edward, a new British student. ―Just Dad's attempted humour Ed,‖ says Nick, with a smile. ―Practice bearings everyone: One o‘clock - Admiral‘s Island; four o‘clock - ruins of an old whaling station; eight and eleven o‘clock - church steeples; two o‘clock - Fort Point light.‖ We are cruising at 30 knots on a glassy calm, spectacular harbour. A slow practice turn to starboard is announced and the Ceres leans gently into the curve like a Formula One racing car on a sharp, 90 degree, banked bend. Down speed to zero. Engines off. The ‗sound of silence.‘ ―Welcome to ‗Admiral‘s Island Airport,‘ home of about 100 pairs of Arctic terns.‖ In a low voice, Nicholas describes their flight patterns and sounds, to Alex, Hans, Edward and Mark, all sitting astern. Mark is a young, bright, marine mammal student from New Zealand. Simultaneously I do the same for Elliott, George and two students sitting forward of the console. ―Notice the cannons at two o‘clock, left by the British to protect the harbour mouth. There are others, tagged by our historical society, just ahead under water.‖ ―Up slow to half speed.‖ A moment passes while Nick and I search the horizon for whale blows. "The rock statue on the right was named the ‗naked man‘ hundreds of years ago and when we tried to get it changed to the ‗naked person,‘ in honour of all liberated women, many fishermen refused because there‘s a ‗naked lady‘ on the other side of this point. It was aptly named the naked god, before the first European settlers.‖ We stop in sheltered waters. ―Bald eagle, two o‘clock, on top of the largest pine tree,‖ announces Nick. ―It‘s an adult. You can tell from the snowy white on the tail and top of its head.‖ ―We are in ‗Green Island Tickle‘ and between eight and ten o'clock live seven species of seabirds, but no eagles!‖ ―And a ‗tickle‘ is?‖ asks Charles, a biophysics graduate from the University of British Columbia, in Vancouver, western Canada. ―A Newfoundland term for the body of water, generally between a peninsula and an island. It was named, presumably because that is where a boat could ‗tickle‘ its bottom, or sides!‖ ―Hey Dad,‖ Nicholas, whispers in my ear from the mast lookout position, ―there are seven humpbacks blowing near the cliffs at Pigeon Cove.‖ Right thumb and forefinger close subtly together, into a ‗circle signal,‘ responding confidentially to this good news. Up slow to three quarter speed, in along the spectacular shoreline of hills, harbours, anchorages, well marked fishing nets, water falls and eagles, we proceed, while finding the calmest waters. ―Harp seals at eleven o‘clock, just watch them dive together!" About 50 seals all look at us until their leader communicates some sort of a synchronous dive concept. I wonder if it was a signal; one could expect that, with a high stress situation. Or was it a rhythmic prelude associated with the beat of a common biorhythm? One day soon humans may study both types of communication for many an organism throughout the biosphere. ―Range 5000 meters, bearing twelve o‘clock, seven humpbacks – ahead,‖ I shout. ―Assuming that Nicholas first saw the whales, from high up on the main mast,‖ Hans comments to Alex, ―Good Lord, that young man must have fantastic sight.‖ We pass a minke whale heading at high speed back towards Trinity. ―The way that Nick identified the humpback whales at almost four miles was to watch for the low contrast blows against the dark cliffs behind. Polaroid glasses and a cap with a brim are a help. You‘ll find lots of such caps in the aft port locker, or you can hold your hand above your eyes to shield the glare and thus differentiate the blows.‖ Hans and Alex unpretentiously don their sunglasses. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 731 ―It‘s Ida‘s group,‖ shouts Nick from on high. ―Blow, and another at twelve o‘clock, range 3000 meters, feeding along the capelin spawning beach at Pigeon Cove. More blows; do you see them, Elliott?‖ ―That time I believe so,‖ comes the reply. ―That time definitely,‖ say together, George and Jay, the latter a second New Zealander, specializing in acoustic mammal behaviour. ―Range a mile, bearing still straight ahead. Down slow to half speed.‖ ―Sounding dive, large tail up - and - down. That‘s Andrew. I could see his large black dots on the underside of his right fluke,‖ announces Nicholas. ―Come on down Nick, we‘ll start the computer program. We should use an ‗alpha concept‘ of one minute as the whales are all in shallow water. Set your watches everyone. Starting with the next countdown we will be transmitting two second, underwater sound pulses every minute.‖ ―Six whales are lunging after capelin along the shoreline and another is closer to us in deeper water,‖ Nicholas broadcasts above the steady, moderate purring of the two, enormous, Honda, four stroke, ‗super‘ engines. ―Down slow to dead slow,‖ and the in-air sounds reduce to a low purring so that calm voices are all that‘s needed for the onboard discussions. ―5-4-3-2-1-mark!‖ shouts Nicholas. ―First signal out.‖ One minute later, second signal out. ―Starboard engine turned off, at the mark, Nick,‖ as he had perceptively already started to enter such a signal as a comment on the computer data base. With one engine off and the other in dead slow even the calmest talk is heard from the forward observers. ―The third signal is coming up, watch any or all of the seven whales for synchronization.‖ There follows another countdown to ‗mark‘ and at that very moment we all see a huge blow on the closest whale. ―It‘s Andrew,‖ declares Nick. ―Synchronization, one o‘clock, 1,000 meters.‖ ―Did you suspect that ‗sync.‘ Dad, or just feel it?" asks Nick. ―The latter. What‘s the stress program reading?‖ ―Amber stress light folks; situation looking good,‖ states Nick to all on board. ―Switch to the passkey program Nick and give a ten second warning before transmissions please.‖ Asking Alex and Hans to watch the coming manoeuvre, Ceres gently turns toward Andrew. Explanations about the next transmission are made, the ‗first message signal,‘ which will be 90 seconds delayed in the ‗offTime‘ window. Elliott and George glance at their watches. ―Hey, ‗offTime,‘ that‘s what you called – one of your supposedly universal variables!" mentions Hans. ―Correct, it‘s actually our variable number three of ten, Hans.‖ ―Warning for the first message signal, Dad," confides Nick. "Thank you." Quickly, a second pinger, tethered to the console, is activated. It‘ll be tossed forward to hit the water precisely at the start of the main computer controlled transmission. Hans comes closer to observe. ―Down one stop on the main sound intensity; log that please.‖ ―5-4-3-2-1-mark, first message signal, ‗gamma one,‘ we call it,‖ announces Nick. ―It‘s lower in intensity by half the output power, or three decibels.‖ ―Estimated location: 700 meters at twelve o‘clock. He‘s probably resting on the bottom as it‘s only 150 meters deep where Andrew was last seen.‖ ―Lunge feeding near the shore at two o‘clock,‖ reports Nick. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 732 Capelin (a small fish), literally fly from the water surface just behind a lunging, hungry humpback and then a partner whale emerges with mouth unbelievably wide open and water rushing from the back sides of its mouth. Gulls hover over the second whale, which they must know is the main feeding one. They literally pluck the fish from the air without landing. The first animal, although probably just as hungry, has forced the fish into the second whale‘s mouth using its long white inside flipper. We then see these same two whales change places in a following lunge feeding incident in which case we have a primary example of mutually, ‗cooperative feeding.‘ ―Andrew knows our ‗passkey‘ so watch for synchronization on the coming, ‗second message signal.‘ This one could be good for you to photograph, George.‖ ―Warning on ‗gamma two.‘ Dad,‖ whispers Nick, as he has remounted to his mast position and he gently taps me with a boot tip, a practiced, concentration and focusing procedure. ―My dear Hans, will you take over on this new transmitter. It should go into the water on Nick‘s ‗mark‘ but you should haul it out between two and three seconds later.‖ ―A-OK as Alex would say! Hey! That‘s poetry!" replies Hans jubilantly. ―5-‗flipper up‘-4-3-2-and, down,‘ right on the mark for gamma two synchronization!" hollers Nick, with excitement in his voice. ―We‘ve green light, low stress conditions and we‘ve a potential, ‗reciprocal, overlapping greeting,‘ one of the terrific thrills of these new animal communication methods.‖ ―The third message component will be ‗onTime.‘ That‘s variable number one. Don‘t expect Andrew to signal ‗onTime‘ but you can expect a signal in the ‗offTime‘ window, 28-32 seconds after our transmission.‖ A ten second warning occurs, which Nicholas communicates via foot tap only! Hans seems ready. Nick announces that Andrew is between ten and eleven o‘clock and then he shouts the countdown to ‗mark.‘ This is the ‗third message signal,‘ we call it ‗alpha one.‘ Nick soon reaches down to point toward the expected bearing and then to steady George, by gently holding his shoulder. ―OK everyone, here comes Andrew‘s second signal. In 5 seconds -3-2- ‗FULL BREACH‘!!!‖ Smash, just after the zero count, and as the 50 ton whale hits the water about half a second late, George is still clicking shots of the enormous splash! ―I got the whole sequence! Great guide work Nick and thanks a lot for helping me to aim and keep steady,‖ reflects George. ―We have finished our greeting or passkey. Next it‘ll be Andrew‘s turn to send his third signal which I predict will be a normal blow.‖ [For actual photographs of such whale message signals, please refer to the ‗Ocean Contact‘ section of the web pages at www.oceancontact.com/.] ―Ten second warning everyone, 5-4-3-2-Blow, one second early,‖ says Nick, (please see Appendix). By now we are nearly beside Andrew so Ceres goes to silent ship exactly on the next ‗alpha time,‘ (by definition, the rhythmic time centered in the ‗onTime‘ window). ―Program for the interrogative of our rhythmic concept for fourth year capelin, Nick. Do you want me to look up the declarative in our dictionary?‖ ―I‘ve got it here in memory, yes, it‘s: ‗late-offTime-late-early.‘ So I just reverse the direction of our rhythmic time from clockwise to counterclockwise to get: ‗early-offTime-early-late,‘ right maestro?‖ asks Nick. ―Yes indeed, carry on. But I‘ll turn down another stop on the sound transmission intensity if you‘ll log it, please.‖ It‘s amazing to see the sudden fascination in Alex and others at this reasonably routine guide conversation, which must be quite novel for them. This may now well be, in fact, a coming experimental demonstration of the quintessential communications discovery of our lives! ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 733 ―How can you be sure that Andrew, the whale, both knows and remembers your concept for fourth year capelin?‖ questions Alex. ―Here we have Ida‘s group and they all know this concept. They learned it by conditional response when we always tested the capelin age, and then delivered the proper message, wherever they were feeding. They know many other rhythmic concepts as well, and they actually teach and frequently remind us to remember our own rhythmic concepts from past contacts.‖ ―Ten second warning, Dad,‖ says Nick and his computer conducts the music of the next four transmitted signals. ―Now watch for a double signal in either of the ‗onTime‘ or ‗offTime‘ windows." ―Review that again Peter, it is hard to keep track of all these signals,‖ says Hans. ―The ‗onTime‘ window, variable number one is now from 58 to 02 seconds on this master watch. The ‗offTime‘ window is variable number three and is set from 28 to 32 seconds. It occurs every time, in this case, that the sweep second hand makes, a one minute revolution or one ‗alpha rhythm.‘ Recall that an ‗alpha rhythm,‘ measured in cycles of ‗Rhythm Based Time‘ per unit of linear time is, in this case, one revolution per one minute. It is purposefully designed by us to exactly match the movement of the sweep second hand on your watch. Later, for eagles, the ‗alpha rhythm‘ will be one cycle of ‗Rhythm Based Time,‘ per twelve seconds. Let‘s watch for Andrew‘s answer; it can come now on any cycle.‖ (‗LateTime‘ is 13-17 seconds; ‗earlyTime‘ is 43-47 seconds.) ―Look up! ‗Lob tail‘- Smash, 'Lob tail' - Smash," Nick reports and records, while George photographs. ―A distinct double signal in the ‗onTime‘ window meaning the affirmative!‖ ―And in simpler English doc?‖ asks Edward. ―We asked the whales if these capelin are four years old and they answered yes!‖ ―And in perhaps more philosophic terms?‖ asks Alex. ―We have demonstrated the interrogation of Nature under low stress conditions using what we consider to be a genuine communication system of Nature. For such cases we have no evidence of any replies other than with honesty and altruism.‖ ―Well that certainly makes it different than language, wouldn‘t you agree, Alex?‖ asks Edward. ―Wouldn't you say that evolution with its survival of the fittest is a natural type of war?‖ questions Edward. ―Agree, but Peter‘s evidence so far shows that the honesty of altruism is a type of peace that is the opposite of war, just as ‗true altruism‘ is so different from a business deal,‖ responds Alex. ―Nick can you program the group size, how many, message please?‖ But Andrew is hungry and he is soon seen inshore with the other feeding humpbacks. ―Watch everyone, Andrew, our past communications leader is on a higher stress feeding break, but another should replace him and continue the identical rhythms and communications sequence.‖ ―This, I‘ve got to see,‖ murmurs Elliott to George. ―Ten second warning, Dad,‖ says Nick again, and his computer conducts more music of the next four transmitted signals. Then for Elliott, a miracle of miracles, as Ida emerges from the feeding whales and with a single synchronized tail slap and a ‗lateTime‘ left flipper slap, answers the question with the number nine! ―Ida, while ending her meal, must‘ve received a message expressing Andrew‘s hunger. We believe that during our ‗Rhythm Based Communication‘ encounters, all nearby whales are listening but only one is a whale-to-human communications leader. When Ida arrived near the Ceres, she took over that position and answered our often-asked question with a tail slap followed by a left flipper slap. We have previously taught these animals, by conditional response, that a tail slap ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 734 represents the number ten and a left flipper slap represents a minus one. So the answer is nine. For your interest in our instructed counting system, a right flipper slap represents a plus one.‖ ―But one tail slap is then the signal ten, not a rhythm,‖ perceptively states Alex. ―Exactly, you have seen how signals and rhythms can be juxtaposed in human animal communications. Synchronized signals, as you saw, can contain both ‗Signal Based Information‘ and ‗Rhythm Based InformaTion‘.‖ (Please note the important use of the upper case ―T‖ in the latter.) Let me remind everyone that so far we have only studied human-animal communications using ‗RBC,‘ but that we are still a fair ways away from studying whale-whale or animal-animal messages. The key difference is that in the former we create the rhythm base, but in the latter there most probably exists one or more rhythms, more natural to the organisms involved. The logic of this last statement is that various confidential combinations of rhythmic bases could make messages private, an important advantage in evolution. When the day comes that organisms share with us their confidential rhythms, humans will have finally and truly joined into the innermost nature of Nature.‖ ―I understood that you now believe there are nine whales in this group,‖ says Charles. ―I do. Look for the missing two,‖ (which are later found at Eagle Beach). Student Seminar - Simple Biophysics Students are assembling in the Eagle Room. ―Attention s‘il vous plait! Merci. This student meeting will try to explain new theoretical concepts about the past, the present and the future. I‘ve already ordered the hot drinks so now‘s our chance for good communication, good questions and good application to your various experiments, and, quite possibly to both your remaining life, as well as your very inner being.‖ ―Do you mean to infer that these discoveries in communications may improve our careers as well as our total well being?‖ asks young Jason. ―Precisely! Let me explain. Animals, other than humans, do not possess what is generally thought of as semantic language. Apparently, the evolutionary selection pressure has not existed in order for them to develop either a language or detailed thoughts of future plans or future creativity. There are no significant cave paintings by non-human species! Animals have memory but their conscious thought ‗seems‘ always in the present, and of the past. Migratory patterns, such as ‗north to feed, south to breed,‘ say for our North Atlantic humpback whales, seem like generalized futuristic thought processes, but they are more likely caused by a genetic trigger based on internal biochemistry, external conditions, or environmentally based learning. But we now define the concept of ‘future,’ to consist of detailed plans and foresight such as are found, so far, only in humans. One‘s past is related to memory and in molecular form memory seems found in all living organisms. ―Now let‘s discuss: ‗A New Logic of an Old Concept,‘ that of: ‗TIME.‘ And in particular, I‘ll mention the mystery of biological aspects of the physical time variable, often represented in your past science courses simply by the lower case symbol t. Using a definitive definition of logic, the following opinions may approach principles governing correct or reliable inference, involving the human enigma of what seems to be an improved temporal theory. ―There now appear to be two temporal types: a) Linear or cyclical ‗Conventional time, t or Ct,‘ also designated as ‗time‘ with the usual lower case t, and, b) Cyclical ‗Rhythm Based Time, RBT, or RT,‘ in contrast designated as ‗Time,‘ spelt with an upper case ‗T,‘ or by the symbol ‗T‘ alone. Additionally we suggest the word ‗TIME,‘ with all upper case letters, be used to represent a sum of t + ‗T‘. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 735 ―With this convenient notation we have the need for new words, with an internal upper case ‗T,‘ such as: ‗duraTion, synchronizaTion, communicaTion,‘ and seemingly the immensely important ‗informaTion,‘ as well as and including closed words such as: ‗onTime, lateTime, offTime, earlyTime, RhythmicTime‘ AND the equally important ‗NowTime,‘ or ‗NowTIME‘, where, as before, ‗TIME‘ = t + ‗T‘, all representing the incorporation of cyclic ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT,‘ or simply ‗Rhythmic Time‘. ―Important differences between these two temporal types a and b, are: ―1a. A duration of ‗Conventional time, t or Ct‘ is displacement divided by velocity where such displacements and velocities are external to a measuring, cyclical, working clock, or if the clock is linear (as for example a water clock), then such a linear clock must match, on a one-to-one basis, the said cyclical clock. ―1b. A ‗duraTion‘ of ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT‘ is displacement divided by velocity where such displacements and velocities are internal to a measuring, cyclical, working clock, or are associated on a one-to-one basis with the internal rhythms of such a clock, as for example an age. ―To clarify these two novel statements, our Earth is a measuring, cyclical, working clock and if one remains in a stationary location then one‘s cyclical velocities are associated with ‗duraTions‘ of ‗T.‘ If however, one moves, then any travel time is in the normal durations of t. In communications science, if one synchronizes one‘s master, internal, biological clock, one‘s ‗Suprachiasmatic Nucleus, SCN,‘ to any exterior ‗Rhythm Based Time‘ cyclical, working clock then the resulting ‗duraTions‘ become essentially ‗internal‘ to such a cyclical, working clock and such becomes a potential starting point for ‗Rhythm Based Communication, RBC.‘ ―2a. ‗Conventional time, t‘ is unidirectional, counting only in the direction from the present to the future, as in radians from 0 to 2pi to 4pi, or, in degrees, from 0 to 360 to 720. ―2b. ‗Rhythm Based Time, RBT‘ or ‗RhythmicTime T‘ may have a sign change at pi radians (180 degrees) and counts within its ‗NowTime,‘ in radians from 0 to pi to 0 (or in degrees from 0 to 180 to 0). ‗T‘ can be bidirectional, as when viewing the Earth from either pole. ―3a. ‗Conventional time, t‘ is relative depending on transmission characteristics (Dr. Albert Einstein). ―3b. ‗RhythmicTime, T‘ is relative to ‗synchronizaTion,‘depending on minds and mind locations, and can be Earth-Sun absolute, based on the Earth‘s rotations. ―Both temporal forms are mental readings OF (not ON) various clocks.‖ ―Peter, there‘s a phone call from England,‖ interrupts Chris ―OK everyone. Review these ideas. They are also in these copies of Target Article 92 from the Karl Jaspers Forum, on <www.kjf.ca>‖. (After a short break). ―Gentlewomen, gentlemen! You‘ve digested some of that ‗intro‘ I presume, so lets talk about ‗NowTIME‘,‖ I say while reentering the Eagle Room. ―I‘ll just say a few words about durations before we simplify our discoveries. Durations are not vectors, because they do not have both magnitude and spacial directions, but they can be associated with vectors, such as in travel, which association has caused past confusions. Durations are but differences in temporal scalar labels. Human abstract mathematics created a ‗theoretical‘ multiplication of vectors but all known, living organism minds, including humans, cannot meaningfully multiply or divide either vectors or especially any of their associated durations. Such multiplications caused problems in 20th century physics. ―As an example, drive a vehicle south from Toronto, Canada, for 12 hours. During this journey ‗Lake Ontario Space‘ rotates eastward to approximately ‗Lake Baikal Space,‘ in Russia. Now your ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 736 journey of 12 hours duration south, plus 12 hours ‗duraTion‘ east, lands you in a ‗China Space!‘ But if you were to multiply these durations, the resultant 144 hours is meaningless. ―There is, in addition, a vocabulary which is easy and essential to understanding new temporal concepts, as all such concepts are always scalar quantities, like pricetags on merchandise, and not vectors, like displacements or velocities. We can define four varieties of such scalar ‗tags‘. ―Firstly we must review modern characteristics of part of an organism‘s mind, also called one‘s ‗Event Space Sphere Or Spheroid,‘ acronym ‗Essos,‘ pronounced ‗Eee-sos.‘ The two ‗Essos Edges,‘ inner and outer, are created by the production of ‗Mental Vector Processes, MVPs‘ which are combinations of mass and/or energy vectors and scalar labels, destined to arrive at one‘s ‗Mental Thought Process, MTP,‘ near ‗Essos Centre‘. (Please see Glossary.) ―Inside one‘s ‗Essos‘ is subjective reality. Outside one‘s ‗Essos,‘ and within an ‗Essos Interior Volume,‘ are one‘s potential future and real past, the latter involving one‘s memory, knowledge, understanding, unconscious, culture, education and more. ―Let the scalar labels of ‗Conventional time, t‘ and ‗RhythmicTime, T‘ be ‗timetags‘ and ‗Timetags‘ respectively. The four varieties of scalar tags are as follows. The subjective ‗timetags‘ and ‗Timetags,‘ part of subjective reality, are within mind, within ‗Essos.‘ Objective ‗timetags‘ and ‗Timetags,‘ part of one‘s objective reality, are ex-mind, ‗ex-Essos,‘ either beyond ones outer ‗Essos‘ boundaries as one‘s potential future, or, within an internal volume, as one‘s memory and more. ―Now for exceedingly important but relatively simple mind mathematics. Within ‗Essos,‘ minds can add scalar labels. But, they cannot multiply them. Hence ‗t+T,‘ t+t, and ‗T+T‘ within mind = ‗Real TIME‘ where ‗TIME‘ = ‗t + T,‘ but ‗t x T,‘ is meaningless, as described earlier in the Toronto to China metaphor. Similarly, colours and shapes, also being scalar labels, can be added, but not multiplied or divided. ―Please do not confuse the scalar characteristics of ‗Conventional time, t‘ and ‗RhythmicTime, T‘ with the ‗transport carriers‘ named ‗Mental Vector Processes, MVPs,‘ which can create ‗Bioscientific Vectors‘ containing the scalar ‗cargos‘ of t and ‗T,‘ or their sum ‗t + T,‘ or other such ‗cargos‘ as colour and shape. These ‗MVPs‘ are simply mass and/or energy vectors transporting scalar ‗cargos‘. They seem the ‗Most Valuable Players‘ in the ‗Game of Life‘. ―We let upper case ‗TIME‘ exist only within ‗Essos,‘ within ‗Mind,‘ and it can involve t, ‗T‘ or ‗t + T‘ but never a temporal product such as ‗t x T.‘ Such a product allows complications for current physics. ―Now we can and should talk a bit more about the important concept of ‗Now TIME,‘ or its equivalent ‗NowTIME‘!‖ Charles then states, ―Please explain one of your favourite sayings: ‗ALL (real) TIME IS NOW TIME.‘ Otherwise temporal concepts are just ‗timetags‘ and ‗Timetags‘.‖ ―No one is negating the continued use of the conventional, physical symbol and variable that we all know as lower case t, which normally stands, and stands alone, for our concept of time. But this concept still remains ‗the enigma of enigmas,‘ the mystery of all philosophic mysteries. The following enlarged concept of ‗TIME,‘ is merely an attempt to solve a part of this enormous enigma. ―Conventional temporal concepts have both a past and a future. Such can be derived, mainly as intervals between events, from measurements and predictions which are scientifically very sound. This means that such measurements can be reproduced by someone else, at some other place, at some other time and with remarkable accuracy. Therefore we must begin our definition with time, or its symbol, the variable lower case t, and build, adding recent suggestions of biophysics, namely that humans may be the only organisms on Earth to have evolved substantial future concepts. So our ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 737 mystery must include a larger group of ideas for which a symbol, upper case ‗TIME‘ representing ‗NowTIME,‘ has a more comprehensive, real and reproducible meaning, with animals as well as with humans. To discover this symbol, we must include another, a second, an independent concept of time. ―We now believe that there is a new additional type of ‗TIME.‘ The older, common and well known first type is on your watch, is in your head and has a past, a present and a future. The newer, additional and less well known type is in your heart, in your feelings and it is always in your present. Now I'll try to describe this newer type of time, based mainly on what humpback whales have demonstrated in experiments right here in Trinity Bay and elsewhere. ―Let‘s proceed with the as yet undefined, biophysical notion of ‗now‘ and its associated, seemingly valid, new physical concept of ‗NowTIME.‘ The experimental discovery of ‗Rhythm Based Time, or RBT,‘ is usually designated with an upper case ‗T‘, only in order to differentiate it from the more usual identification of ‗Conventional time‘ with its lower case t. ‗RBT‘ or ‗T‘ is defined as: ‗a mental perception of lateness relative to an agreed, biophysical, cyclical concept of synchronizaTion (or onTimeness) between two or more minds‘. (Please see Glossary.) Experiments with many species of animals have indicated that ‗RBT‘ is biophysically different from ‗Conventional time, t.‘ This new ‗Time,‘ which is used in communications for the encoding of information, by humans and possibly all species of other animals, is always in the present! So how do we enlarge the model of ‗Conventional time, t‘? ―We must firstly think of ‗NowTIME,‘ as, say, one cycle of ‗RBT,‘ and then assign its measurement to the circumference of an ‗Event Space Sphere.‘ Once we achieve this experimentally, as has been done mainly with humpback and other whales, we can now let measurements of ‗Conventional time, t‘ within the sphere be related to the perception of ‗real‘ now events as received by any ‗Mental Thought Process, MTP,‘ located near the center of its sphere. Not only is the diameter of one‘s ‗Event Space Sphere‘ arbitrary, in this model, but ‗RBT‘ as measured on the surface of the sphere has the properties of supersymmetry. It will vary identically for a pathway along any orientation of a sphere circumference. Vectors with ‗Conventional time‘ as a scalar cargo, move in the direction of vector energy or mass; ‗RBT‘ always orients itself orthogonally and rotates. ―Now I‘ll say this in a different way. We all have an imaginary sphere around us, on and inside of which all events feel in our hearts and minds to be ‗in the present.‘ Outside the sphere on one side, the side of incoming energy, events are in our future. On another side they are in our past. So we define events such as my utterances, or your cough Mark, as being in our ‗NowTIME,‘ but only until the energy of the event, for example the energy of a sound, leaves the sphere, until one's next heart beat, next breath, next cough or until your mind switches to a different set of thoughts. Suppose Mark‘s cough energy traveled due north to Alex. Then we could label that moving sound with ‗Conventional time, t,‘ the type that you know. As Alex hears the sound, the cough is real, the ‗Conventional time‘ labels are real and both are in Alex‘s ‗NowTIME.‘ But Alex has his own ‗RBT‘ biorhythms which by definition are cycling, just like the wheels of a bike, but these cycles orient themselves into the east-west direction, as opposed to the incoming north-south direction! The new ‗Time T‘ is always at right angles to the old ‗time t.‘ But most importantly, in new communications research they work together like best friends! They add to create a new, upper case ‗TIME‘. ―All events are associated with energy and/or mass vectors and those occurring outside one‘s ‗Event Space Sphere‘ are by definition not in one‘s ‗NowTIME.‘ Also associated with such vectors are ‗timetags,‘ (or ‗t-labels‘), mental, inscribed, machine made, etc., which are in fact the very ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 738 numbers, and perfectly valid numbers, that we have been using to measure time, in all fields; ‗timetags‘ (or ‗t-labels‘) can label vectors with ‗Conventional time concepts‘. ―From one‘s future such labeled vectors enter one‘s ‗Event Space Sphere‘ and it is then that the said energy and/or mass which penetrates one‘s present awareness, and their ‗timetags‘ or ‗t-labels‘ become additionally associated with real ‗NowTIME.‘ Upon leaving, one‘s ‗NowTIME‘ the ‗timetags‘ become part of one‘s past. The transition occurs when the ‗Mental Thought Process, MTP,‘ at or near the center of the ‗Event Space Sphere,‘ switches internal mental processing from one set of associated ‗NowTIME‘ vectors representing a distinct event, to another set. An example could be ‗conscious thought change‘. ―‗TIME‘ is in the present mind of an organism now, and for any diameter of its ‗Event Space Sphere,‘ it consists of real ‗NowTIME‘ concepts, real time t and its ‗timetags‘ and real ‗RhythmicTime, T‘ and its ‗Timetags.‘ Outside of one‘s ‗Event Space Sphere‘ (both past and future) are valid labels, valid numbers, valid memories, valid plans, but they have not the ‗reality of nowness’ or of ‗NowTIME!‘ Thus the submission that: ‘ALL (real) TIME IS NOW TIME.’ Otherwise temporal concepts are just ‗timetags‘ and ‗Timetags‘.‖ Elliston Research (several days later) Nicholas is last to climb aboard as Kirk, on shore, casts the lines away and we head out between partly grassy, inner islands, bleached in places with flat, surface nests and eggs. Circling above the islands are many glistening white, Arctic and common terns. Next come tens of thousands of puffins, some on the water‘s surface in great blackish clusters, most, however, roosting at burrow edges, while others are well out of sight at ocean depths, gathering capelin for their growing chicks which are relatively safe on the towering South Gull Island. Beyond are the humpbacks! ―Main transmitter on signals every sixty seconds Nick.‖ Puffins burst to the surface on all sides as Ceres slows evenly to ‗dead slow,' to give these amazing diving alcids plenty of opportunity to plummet again if they are in our forward going pathway. With the wind calming quickly some have great difficulty becoming airborne with four or five fish in their beaks, an extraordinary payload! ―Feeding humpbacks must have trouble avoiding so many puffins,‖ remarks Hans. ―They are never found ingested by the whales, probably because puffins seem to fly better underwater than in the air! However, an unfortunate gull was once discovered wedged between baleen plates of a humpback in Norway!‖ ―When we get closer, watch for a whale firing a puffin into the air as they are too large to fit down the whale‘s throat!‖ jestingly adds Nick. ―OK team, we have Ida‘s group of nine humpbacks and at least three minkes or piked whales. Keep a good lookout for signals at the same time as Nick‘s ‗count downs.‘ One humpback should finish feeding before too long.‖ ―5-4-3-2-1-mark,‖ says Nick as a misdirected puffin flies between Alex and George, standing less than a meter apart in the bow of Ceres! Nick has asked Alex to scan between 9 o‘clock (port beam) and 12 o‘clock (dead ahead), and George between 12 and 3. Both men are wearing brimmed hats and Polaroid glasses to reduce the surface reflected light and increase contrast. ―Remember to keep the eyes relaxed and scan 90 degrees, or pi/2 radians in about 5-8 seconds in both directions,‖ I remind everyone. ―Think of your clock bearings so that you can communicate to the group, first bearing, then range, if a whale appears.‖ ―Blow, 4 o‘clock, 100 meters, heading toward us, it‘s Andrew,‖ says Nicholas. ―10 seconds to alpha. Mark! Synchronization!‖ ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 739 ―Use the ‗offTime‘ passkey, Nick.‖ Then a kick tap from the mast signifies ‗roger.‘ ―Please explain the communications,‖ exclaims Hans from his starboard stern observation post. ―For Andrew we will use the ‗passkey message‘ of ‗offTime‘ twice, then ‗onTime‘ once, to set the RBC variables at 30 and 60 seconds for future messages,‖ I reply. ―Seven o‘clock VERY CLOSE,‖ shouts Elliott! ―Heading our way, that‘s Ida, then Hubert, then Cecil, they‘ve identified us for sure,‖ I say. ―Ready on the first message signal 2-1-mark,‖ announces Nick. ―Minke, 1 o‘clock, crossing under the bow, watch for the white flipper ‗armbands‘,‖ I say to Alex and George. ―Three o‘clock - one kilometer, Gannets plunge-diving, watch for whales or dolphins driving the capelin toward the surface,‖ as I point to our starboard beam. ―Second ‗offTime‘ signal 2-1-mark, in sync. with the coded computer beeps,‖ says Nick. ―The greeting will be complete, gentlemen in about twenty seconds so watch for signals in your segments, I‘ll take the forward half, Nick the stern.‖ The third and final underwater, acoustic pulse is softer, gentler, but right ‗onTime.‘ Then miracle of miracles, Ida and Hubert surface together and exactly in the middle of our ‗offTime‘ window with precisely synchronized blows, one on either side of Ceres. Then they signal together in the next ‗offTime‘ window and Andrew joins with all three, exhaling together in the ‗onTime‘ window. Such is a very complex but successful ‗reciprocal greeting.‘ All the while we are proceeding east at dead slow using one engine; both engines are raised to shallowest depths. We now transmit the south concept, ‗late, offTime, late,‘ and then turn the Ceres abruptly south. All three humpbacks follow. We transmit the north concept, ‗late, onTime, late,‘ and then turn north with the whales following. We repeat these concepts again and then again with the same results. ―Now you must ask them if our east west coordinates are their ‗Conventional time‘,‖ says Alex. ―That means abandoning the ‗RBT‘ windows. What do you suggest?‖ ―I calculate that if you head east, you could transmit three pulses every six seconds at 6, 12 and 18 seconds, then west, using pulses every twelve seconds at 12, 24 and 36 seconds,‖ replies Alex. ―If you are ready Nick, we‘ll turn east and west for three messages in each direction.‖ And the experiment progresses with detailed computer records but slightly less detailed human conscious understanding, and no cetacean mimicry. ―Now comes the crucial test Alex. We must switch to the interrogative and look for meaningful replies.‖ So we reverse the ‗Rhythm Based Time, RBT‘ that is similar to flipping your watch over, and transmit ‗early, offTime, early,‘ while going south. Ida answers in the affirmative with two flipper slaps in the ‗onTime‘ window. We repeat and then we head north and transmit ‗early, onTime, early‘ and again Ida answers yes! We repeat again and then test reliability by heading south and using the identical ‗north message‘ and Ida, catching on quickly, answers no with two tail slaps in our ‗offTime‘ window, meaning negative. Then comes the big test! We head east with reversed ‗RBT‘ and three signals outside our ‗RBT‘ window variables to represent ‗Conventional time.‘ Ida answers yes. Then we head west with signals at 48, 36 and 24 seconds (‗RBT‘ reversed from the previous west message) and again Ida answers yes, this time with a half breach with two distinct flipper slaps on landing, just a few boat lengths away! There seems no forward going ‗Conventional time‘ but instead variable, bidirectional windows of ‗Rhythmic Time.‘ ―Looking good gentlemen; we must repeat the data and perhaps we‘ll get a different communicating whale if Ida‘s stress increases due to hunger.‖ We try it again in differing order and each time Alex follows closely with efficient humanhuman communications aboard Ceres. Sure enough, Hubert switches places with Ida, then Andrew ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 740 takes over the communications leadership. Each repeats Ida‘s replies. Anyone watching from the land must think that we are doing a geophysical grid survey for sunken treasure but I would have enjoyed explaining to them that we appear to be uncovering perhaps the greatest treasure of all, Nature‘s knowledge. ―If only Mr. Einstein could be here now I feel sure he would rejoice in this evidence for the missing variable of Nature, that‘s ‗Rhythm Based Time‘ and its orthogonal, bidirectional and absolute properties.‖ We repeat the experiment on into encroaching darkness and then head for the safe harbour of Bonavista. Passing the peninsula headland I explain that we are closer to Europe, via the great circle route, than any land in North America and that this was not only the likely landfall of John Cabot in 1497 but also of vast numbers of trading ships during the following 400 years. It is also the location of the first satellite tagged humpback whale named Theophilus Argus after both the fisherman and the satellite system used for tracking! We were able to sit in the Ceta-Research laboratory back at Trinity and track the whale hundreds of miles away. This was for both daytime behaviour where we have some knowledge over the past hundreds of years, as well as for night-time behaviour, where we have practically none! In dead calm waters under the night lights of one of the largest fishing towns in the world, we speed toward the harbour, hearing whales in the distance and avoiding rocky shoals that are well known to Nicholas and myself. We entered Bonavista harbour just as had the replica of Cabot‘s Matthew, in 1997, celebrating the 500th anniversary. However they had encountered stormy seas with a cold winter-like wind, but were welcomed by Canada‘s Queen, who had helicoptered in for the festive occasion. GLOSSARY (Single quotation marks are used, as in text, primarily for new concepts.) Altruism - Having regard for others; to give or to act without reward; to be unselfish. Bidirectional - Functioning in two spacial directions. Biophysics - The science of the application of the laws of physics to biological phenomena. ‗Cetacean-Contact‘ - ‗Rhythm Based CommunicaTion, RBC‘ with whales, dolphins and porpoises. Clock - Any mechanism and/or life system that represents, or is capable of producing cyclic, recurrent or predictable motion, and measures temporal qualities. ‗ClosedWords‘ - Neglecting a normal space between words (e.g. OnTime). Used to signify ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT.‘ Communication and ‗CommunicaTion‘ - The passing of information involving: a) transmission, b) reception and c) the altering of subsequent behaviour. Please see ‗SBC‘ and ‗RBC.‘ ‗CommunicaTion‘ - ‗Rhythm Based CommunicaTion, RBC.‘ Conventional - Traditional (in opposition to recent inventions etc.). ‗Conventional time, t or Ct,‘ or the commonly used noun ‗time.‘ Please see the following section named ‗Conventional time Categories‘. Cyclic - Revolving in recurrent series of events and/or phenomena. Dimensions - a) ‗Spacial dimensions,‘ which define all known geometry, or b) Variables, which may be scalar quantities, the usage of which is now not recommended in order to avoid confusion with a). Displacement - Distance in a direction. Duration - A ‗Conventional timetag of t or Ct‘ of increased quantity less one of lesser quantity. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 741 ‗DuraTion‘ - A ‗Timetag of T or RBT,‘ of increased quantity less one of lesser quantity. ‗Earth Life‘ - An ‗Earth source domain‘ using communication or ‗communicaTion.‘ Empathy - ―Experiencing strong affection or passion‖ (Britain and U.S.), ―Feeling into, as in watching a high-wire artist‖ (German), definitions by Dr. Frans De Waal. ‗Essos‘ - ‗Event Space Sphere Or Spheroid‘ (pronounced ‗Eee-sos‘), which is a synonym for part of one‘s ‗Conscious Mind.‘ Such is an abstract volume useful to describe the dynamic orientation and magnitude of conscious space variables, real ‗Now time and Now Time‘ and their combination called ‗Now TIME.‘ ‗Essos‘ and ‗Ex-Essos‘ have been called ―Subjective-inclusive Experience‖ and ―Mind-independent Pre-structured Reality,‖ respectively, by Dr. Herbert Muller of McGill U. ‗Future‘ - Scalar labels of ‗Conventional time, t or Ct‘ or ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT,‘ and their associated ‗Mass/Energies,‘ (definitions to follow) that have not yet arrived at one‘s ‗Essos.‘ ‗Information (SBC)‘ - Information encoded in the sensory modalities, of signals, signs and symbols, and described by ‗Conventional Communication‘ or ‗Signal Based Communication, SBC.‘ (‗SBC‘ definition to follow). Please also see ‗World Phenomena‘ below. ‗InformaTion (RBC)‘ - ‗InformaTion‘ encoded in ‗Time,‘ that is ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT.‘ This is the medium of ‗Rhythm Based Communication, RBC or CommunicaTion.‘ Please see definitions above and below as well as that of ‗World Phenomena,‘ below. ‗Mass/Energy‘ - Either mass or energy or both. ‗Mental Thought Process, MTP‘ - An area near ‗Essos Centre‘ for receiving and processing mind‘s ‗Mental Vector Processes, MVPs‘ (this very important definition follows directly). ‗Mental Vector Process, MVP‘ - A combination of a ‗Mass/Energy‘ vector and any number of scalar quantities, formed at or outside one‘s ‗Essos Edge,‘ and ending at one‘s ‗Essos Centre.‘ ‗MVPs‘ seem the ‗Most Valuable Players‘ in the ‗Game of Life.‘ Mind (conscious) - ‗Mass/Energy‘ and information, or ‗informaTion,‘ involved with the architecture of a central nervous system and within one‘s ‗Essos.‘ The important ‗Essos‘ definition above is a synonym for part of one's 'Conscious Mind' and it includes additional conscious mental aspects. Mind (unconscious) - ‗Mass/Energy‘ and information, or ‗informaTion,‘ possibly involved with any active cell of a living being but not within ‗Essos.‘ The important ‗Essos‘ definition is above. ‗Nature-Contact‘ - ‗RBC‘ with humans and Nature. ‗Nowness‘ - One‘s immediate present. ‗Now time‘ - ‗Conventional time, t or Ct,‘ associated with events in one‘s present and contained within one‘s ‗Essos.‘ Please see ‗Conventional time Categories‘ to follow. ‗Now Time or NowTime‘ - ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT,‘ associated with events in one‘s present and contained within one‘s ‗Essos.‘ Please see ‗ClosedWords‘ above and ‗Time and TIME Categories‘ to follow. ‗Now TIME or NowTIME‘ - Both ‗Conventional time, t or Ct,‘ and ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT,‘ associated with events in one‘s present and contained within one‘s ‗Essos.‘ Please see ‗ClosedWords‘ above and ‗Time and TIME Categories‘ to follow. ‗OnTime, LateTime, OffTime, EarlyTime‘ - Elementary cyclical ‗Windows‘ of ‗RBC.‘ ‗Ontimeness‘ - synchronization (defined below). ‗OnTimeness‘ - ‗synchronizaTion‘ (defined below). ‗Orthogonal‘ - At right angles or 90 degrees. ‗Orthogonal Spacial Dimensions, OSDs‘ - of which there are a maximum of only three. (as an example: east, north and up). Please see ‗Space‘ definition below. Paradigm - A mode of viewing the world which underlies scientific theory for a period of history. Paradigm Shift - A fundamental change in approach and/or philosophy. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 742 ‗Past‘ - Temporal labels and their associated ‗Mass/Energy‘ that have left one‘s ‗Essos.‘ Perception - An interpretation based on one‘s understanding. ‗RBC‘ - Please see ‗Rhythm Based Communication,‘ plus Communication and ‗CommunicaTion.‘ ‗Rhythm Based Communication, RBC‘ or ‗CommunicaTion‘ - Encoding in RBT and using ‗InformaTion (RBC)‘ or ‗RBI.‘ Please see definition of ‗Rhythm Based InformaTion, RBI.‘ ‗RBI‘ - Please see ‗Rhythm Based Information,‘ ‗Information (RBC)‘ and ‗World Phenomena.‘ ‗Rhythm Based InformaTion, RBI‘ - ‗InformaTion‘ encoded in ‗Time, T or RBT.‘ ‗RBT‘ - Please see ‗Rhythm Based Time‘ or ‗T‘ ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT‘ (as opposed to ‗Conventional time, t or Ct‘). ―A mental perception of lateness relative to an agreed, biophysical, cyclical concept of synchronizaTion (or onTimeness) between two or more minds.‖ Please see ‗Time and TIME Categories‘ ‗SBC‘ - Please see ‗Signal Based Communication.‘ ‗Signal Based Communication, SBC‘ - ‗Signal Based Information, SBI‘ encoded in ‗Conventional time, t or Ct.‘ Please see definition of ‗Signal Based Information, SBI.‘ ‗SBI‘ - Please see ‗Signal Based Information,‘ ‗Information (SBC)‘ and ‗World Phenomena.‘ ‗Signal Based Information, SBI‘ - Information encoded in signals, signs and symbols and using ‗Conventional time, t or Ct.‘ Scalar - Having only magnitude, without spacial direction, that is, without spacial dimensions. Space - Vectors, always containing both magnitudes, and spacial directions of: I) east-west, northsouth, up-down, II) right-left, forward-backward,, up-down or III) north celestial pole, declination, right ascension east of the 1st Pt. of Aries. I and III are objective, II is subjective or ‗of Essos.‘ ‗Spacial Dimensions‘ - Vectors which are most often considered orthogonal (in which case there are up to three and only three spacial dimensions). Please see definition of ‗Space,‘ above. Spacial Directions - Space vectors, which are not necessarily orthogonal. Symmetric - When certain positions rotate into other positions in the same set. ‗Sync.‘ - An abbreviation for either synchronization or ‗synchronizaTion.‘ Synchronization - Happening at the same linear or cyclical, ‗Conventional time, t or Ct.‘ ‗SynchronizaTion‘ - Happening at the same cyclical, ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT.‘ ‗Temporal Tags‘ - Please see ‗Conventional timetags, Timetags, and TIMEtags,‘ to follow. ‗True altruism‘ - To give or to act without the expectation of a reward. Vector - A quantity having spacial direction as well as magnitude. ‗Whale-Contact‘ - ‗RBC‘ between humans and whales. ‗Windows‘ - Relatively short ‗RBT duraTions‘ of ‗Rhythm Based CommunicaTion, RBC.‘ ‗World Phenomena‘ - Mass, Energy, ‗Information, (SBC)‘ in t, ‗InformaTion, (RBC)‘ in ‗T.‘ ‗Conventional time Categories‘ ‗Conventional Communication‘ - Please see ‗Signal Based Communication, SBC.‘ ‗Conventional time, t or Ct,‘ or the commonly used noun ‗time.‘ Displacement divided by velocity or space divided by speed, as a temporal, scalar label which can move in the direction of its associated ‗Mass/Energy‘ vector. Traditional concepts of ‗time‘ differ from the new ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT.‘ Please see ‗Time and TIME Categories,‘ to follow. ‗Conventional time, t or Ct, tags‘ - The association, either physical or mental, of ‗Conventional time, t or Ct‘ scalar labels, with ‗Mass/Energy‘ vectors, or simply ‗time t‘ scalars. Please see following definitions. ‗Conventional timetags (developing)‘ - Varying scalar labels of ‗Conventional time, t or Ct‘ produced by a working, linear or cyclical clock. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 743 ‗Conventional timetags (fixed)‘ - Scalar labels, either mental, inscribed, machine made, geophysical, geologic or others, of ‗Conventional time, t or Ct.‘ ‗Conventional timetag-vector‘ - A ‗Conventional timetag, t‘ on a ‗Mass/Energy‘ vector. Some call this a ‗time-vector,‘ which is discouraged as time does not flow on its own. ‗Time and TIME Categories‘ ‗T‘ - Please see the following definition of the new ‗Time‘ or ‗Rhythm Based Time, RBT.‘ ‗Time,‘ ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT.‘ - ―A mental perception of lateness relative to an agreed, biophysical, cyclical concept of synchronizaTion (or onTimeness) between two or more minds.‖ — Via Dr. Hitoshi Kitada (Tokyo), T=exp(it(+/- 2pi)H/Planck constant h), and for any complex number exp(i theta) on a sphere of radius one (where theta is any fixed real number), then exp(i theta)exp(it(2pi)H/h is a solution of the Schrodinger equation where H = a Hamiltonian operator, and for theta = (2n+1)pi, (and n = 0, +/- 1, +/- 2, - - ), exp(i theta) = -1 and T becomes both bidirectional and ―rotation free.‖ ‗TIME‘ - ‗Conventional time, t or Ct,‘ plus ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT,‘ within ‗Essos.‘ ‗Time T, or TIME (t+T) Tags‘ - The association, either physical or mental, of ‗Timetags or TIMEtags,‘ with ‗Mass/Energy‘ vectors, or simply ‗Time T‘ or ‗TIME‘ scalars. Please see following definitions. ‗Timetags (developing)‘ - Varying scalar labels of ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT‘ produced by a working, cyclical clock. ‗Timetags (fixed)‘ - Scalar labels, either mental, inscribed, machine made, geophysical, geologic or others, of ‗Rhythm Based Time, T or RBT.‘ ‗Time/timetags‘ - Either ‗Timetags and/or timetags.‘ ‗TIMEtags‘ - ‗Timetags and/or timetags‘ on vectors with combined, resultant ‗TIME‘ labels, always within one‘s ‗Essos,‘ and comprising ‗Real TIME.‘ ‗Timetag-vector‘ - A ‗Timetag‘ on a ‗Mass/Energy‘ vector. Some call this a ‗Time-vector,‘ which is discouraged as ‗Time‘ does not flow on its own. ‗Timing‘ - The arithmetic of all combined time, ‗Time and TIME‘ concepts, including recordings. APPENDIX ‘RBC’ and General Experimental Technique ―Firstly choose a time of low internally and externally caused stress, such as, no need for nutrition or, no fear of mind/body discomfort. Then ‗share a rhythm!‘ This can be interpreted as energy packages traveling between organisms, which signals have a common, compatible, between pulse ‗duraTion‘ called an ‗alpha concept.‘ Upon synchronization, these ‗duraTions‘ become a shared rhythm. Now add a second simple message called a ‗beta concept,‘ as explained presently, and to your surprise, ‗Rhythm Based Communication, RBC‘ can begin!‖ ―It might be useful if you gave common examples of ‗alpha concepts‘ and some good communication signals for both whales and land mammals as well as bald eagles,‖ interjects Nicholas. ―OK, or as some of you would say now, just ‗kay.‘ For roosting eagles we use an ‗alpha concept‘ or rhythm of 12 seconds with mainly whistles and light flashes for signals. For fox kits and snowshoe hares we use a rhythm of 20 seconds with mainly finger snaps and rock taps. For beaver, black bear, caribou and moose we use 32 seconds, underwater sounds for beaver but mainly comb flicks and light flashes for bear, caribou and moose. For whales we use 60 and 90 second ‗alpha ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 729-744 Beamish, Peter, ‘Conventional time t’ versus ‘Rhythmic Time T’ (Two Faces of One Mystery) 744 concepts‘ with computerized, underwater, acoustic transmissions of various intensities. By the way Nick and Kirk, choose four to join Ceres this morning on the water. Everyone should get chances when whale contact space is available. ―Next you transmit non frightening, rhythmic, ‗alpha concepts,‘ called ‗alpha rhythms‘. ―Record identification and behavioural details of any animal that returns a signal appearing to be at the same time as your transmitted signal, which behaviour is ‗possible-synchronization,‘ or ‗possible sync.‘ Cease all transmissions for a 10-15 minute coffee break if no sign of a ‗possible sync.‘ occurs in 15-20 minutes. Postpone the experiment if active feeding or external stress is suggested. ―Following ‗possible sync.‘ send the next signal ‗late,‘ which is a ‗beta concept.‘ This is ‗the first message signal.‘ Transmit another signal ‗late‘ using the identical amount of ‗lateness.‘ 'This is ‗the second message signal.‘ It will and must follow ‗the first message signal‘ by the ‗alpha concept,‘ which, in other words, is the ‗pulse interval‘ before synchronization. ―Record all signals from your single animal or any in a group but place maximum effort in following and observing the animal associated with the suspected synchronization. Note that you have not proven anything beyond coincidence yet, but, that will come next, as you hopefully enter the world of ‗RBC‘. ―Transmit the third message signal which must be ‗onTime‘ or at a ‗RhythmicTime‘ corresponding to the beginning of the synchronized ‗duraTion‘ which is also called the ‗alpha time.‘ Successful ‗RBC‘ is now, complete if receiving partial message mimicry, so keep up a maximum effort to observe and record, without transmissions. ―For example, a transmitted message of ‗late, late, onTime,‘ which gives a ‗key‘ of the amount of lateness, or the ‗beta concept,‘ should return the key with a mutual understanding of both the ‗alpha and beta concepts,‘ when you receive signals which are ‗late, late, onTime.‘ Then, return to the main research lab, across Taverner‘s Path from the Inn, or find Tim, Kirk, or myself with news of success, good data or new knowledge.‖ There is student silence, save for the scratching of note taking. Then abruptly hands go up. ―Exactly what is an ‗alpha concept‘?‖ asks one. ―It is an idea in your mind, presumably transmitted to the mind of an organism, which is simply the between pulse ‗duraTion‘ during intended ‗synchronizaTions.‘ We use this ‗duraTion,‘ ‗synchronizaTion‘ and ‗onTime‘ etc. spelling to emphasize the ‗RhythmicTime T,‘ not ‗Conventional time t‘,‖ as I copy these ‗RBC‘ words onto a flip chart. ―Then what again is a ‗beta concept‘?‖ questions another. ―It is an idea in your mind, hopefully transmitted to the mind of an organism, which is simply the ‗duraTion‘ of the first one quarter of the ‗alpha concept,‘ rhythmic cycle. It starts with ‗synchronizaTion‘ and ends in the ‗lateTime‘ window. Similarly, the ‗gamma and delta concepts‘ are the ‗duraTions‘ of half and three quarters of the same rhythmic cycle, ending in the ‗offTime‘ and ‗earlyTime‘ windows, respectively.‖ Tim joins in with, ―Your opening message, now called a ‗passkey,‘ or in human concepts simply a greeting, will then be as mentioned, ‗late, late, onTime,‘ or ‗beta, beta, alpha.‘ This has already been programmed into your computers by hitting both the ‗Psion‘ and ‗P‘ buttons at the same time.‖ ―Humpback whales are now teaching us that ‗offTime, offTime, onTime‘ or ‗gamma, gamma, alpha,‘ is another and different passkey. This message seems more universal, so you might want to try it if you don‘t get message mimicry from the programmed passkey. I‘m beginning to feel that both keys work but convey slightly different but as yet unknown specific meanings.‖ ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

656 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth Conference Report Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth Christopher Holvenstot* Abstract th A review of the 18 annual TSC interdisciplinary conference on consciousness sponsored and organized by the Center for Consciousness Studies at the University of Arizona and supported by the Perfjell Foundation of Sweden. Key Words: TSC 2011, consciousness, science, conference, Stockholm, anti-physicalist. Anyone who has ever been to a TSC conference will know that it is impossible to sum them up; impossible to attend to all of the more than 300 papers presented in plenary sessions, concurrent sections, workshops, posters, and art installations; impossible to know whether one has seen and heard the best of everything; impossible to absorb all the perspectives one has managed to see and hear; impossible to extrapolate all the implications of what one has managed to absorb. The best a reviewer can do is offer a peek into the underlying ethos of this particular conference. Unlike neural assemblages of the past, this one had the flavor of the Big Top, with larger-than-life performances, colorful and plentiful side-shows, the tension of the high-wire, and a pace and rhythm that quickened the heart. The exposition was launched in the center ring with a well-staged war of world-views. Leonard Mlodinow trapezed directly from Arlanda Airport into Stockholm University just in the nick of time to upstage Deepak Chopra who (temporarily losing sight of his transcendental spirit) had seconds earlier called Mlodinow a cowardly no-show and was claiming default victory. Mlodinow mounted the stage yanking off his red varsity jacket while recounting a travel snafu that stranded him in Amsterdam, hugged a startled Chopra and proclaimed his sincere love ─ effectively upsetting the stereotypes of cold-minded scientist and warm-hearted spiritual leader. Though clearly sleep-deprived Mlodinow dove into modestly and gracefully defending physical monism from the idealist monist attacks Chopra had been polishing allday long with larger-than-life showmanship in a 7 hour preconference workshop on the very same stage. Both gave light-hearted, chummy performances based on a book they have coauthored due out in the fall. Though clearly a marketing ploy, they provided very welcome high entertainment value in a venue better known for dry and somber discourse. Chopra has a large presence and wondrous talents but his marketing techniques were something new at these conferences and some of the delegates were disconcerted by these. What seemed like manipulative * Correspondence: Christopher Holvenstot, Independent Researcher in Consciousness Studies. E-Mail: cholvenstot@yahoo.com. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 657 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth marketing techniques were being used to try to fill the hall for the Deepak Chopra‟s „celebrity‟ preconference workshop. The conference promotional material had claimed months in advance that there were only a few balcony seats left in the „famous‟ Aula Magna Hall for Chopra‟s preconference event, and suggested that preconference attendees should hold their seats for the TSC Conference Opening/Public Forum which occurred immediately afterward – the implication being that if you did not buy one of the few remaining $99 tickets to Chopra‟s workshop, you could not attend the Conference Opening/Public Forum. Alas, the hall was actually only around 25% capacity. I suspect the conference organizers will return to relying on legitimate intellectual interest. The off-putting marketing technique may have prevented more attendance than it drew in, and likely scared off the economy-bound Swedes for whom the free Public Forum was supposedly intended. Chopra had miscalculated the character of the delegates and the sensibility of the Swedes. Sweden, the Swedes, and the Stockholmian sensibility in particular, provided the physical and sociological context for this conference. The Swedish culture is characteristically secular, open-minded, egalitarian, with a fair and just socio-economic uniformity arising without a significant loss of individual autonomy. This tangible urbane cultural flavor invisibly informed the ebb and flow of ideas, creating an intelligent, sensible, intuitive balancing act that has not been achieved at similar conferences elsewhere. Of course familiar troubles provide the usual analytical context of these conferences. What, pray-tell, is the relationship between consciousness and physics? Does consciousness arise from physical principles or are physical principals the product of conscious processes, the natural result of the interpretive structure of human brains? etc, etc. Is consciousness non-local, also occurring outside of brains, thus rendering our brain obsession an obsolete analytical grounding-point? What is the scope of consciousness? What is the definition? Is it physical? Is it spiritual? Is it a combination of these or something else entirely? And the even more hidden question, “Whose version of reality should we use to contextualize this debate?” Chopra‟s early and loud dominance in these proceedings infused Aula Magna Hall with a context of Vedic principles with which to offset the precepts and assumptions of a typical scientific conference. And Chopra‟s interest in these conferences may have other very positive long-term effects. We did not (and did not intend to) answer any of the major questions while in Stockholm but it behooves us as an emerging field to share the questions being raised, as well as the implications at stake for everyone should our communal ideological preferences on reality-defining issues fall one way or the other. Who better than Mlodinow and Chopra to spread the word of what is happening in this vital field of inquiry to a word-weary, sound-bite oriented world? Their compelling science vs. spirituality argument can be said to loosely represent the underlying tensions in the field of consciousness studies. The developmental cohesion so necessary for progress in a field of consciousness studies is fundamentally thwarted by the contentions inherent within a similar kind of split. Airing our dirty laundry outside of academia promises to invite and incite the critical energy needed to overcome these incessant internal obstacles. We know from past conferences that neither monist polarization nor dualist conciliation have served us as sufficiently explanatory. Mlodinow and Chopra, while intending to crystallize the issues with an innovative new clarity, only skimmed the surface of a more subtle dichotomy deeply infecting and severely protracting the developmental phase of a science of consciousness. Unfortunately, Mlodinow and Chopra stated their two-dimensional argument and fled the proceedings without being influenced by ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 658 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth the depth and breadth and intricacy of the inquiries for which these conferences are well-known. The assembled delegates have been dealing with the finer points of these issues in the trenches for years. When the spot light went up in ring number two the Strongman of Science was there flexing his empirical muscles. The mostly brain-oriented plenary sessions animated Aula Magna hall with the rapt attention of those who love to see the causal-physical empirical world-view putting the hammer to the lever that propels the ball that rings the bell. Ding, ding, ding. Neural correlates, transcranial therapies, electromagnetic fields, anesthesia, quantum biology, and so on, were presented in well-attended sessions that were occasionally punctuated by the squeaky protestations of those who saw their own more holistic understanding of consciousness (and reality) discounted by the unquestioned underlying assumption that neural correlates, quantum processes, and electromagnetic fields ARE the very definition and explanation of what consciousness is. Waves are indeed making waves in the brain sciences: waves internally produced by DNA through water molecules (Nobel laureate Luc Montagnier gave a talk on this); by neuronal cells via ultra-weak biophoton emission (Vahid Salari); or waves externally applied using pulsed ultrasound (William Tyler) or using electromagnetic fields (David McCormick) to stimulate action potentials in the brain. Ringmaster Hameroff whipped our attention onto microtubules at the conclusion of each and every plenary. Fine. But for those who can see no viable correlation between a quantum physical explanation of microtubule signal-transfer and a meaningful explanation of the rich perspectival nature of conscious experience, this repetitive reminder of his pet theory, as well as the overly brain-oriented presentations at the plenary level, despite being very important work, seemed annoyingly self-serving. But Hameroff is forgiven all theoretical biases. It is easy to sit back and criticize but organizing a conference of this magnitude is a gargantuan responsibility for which he deserves great credit and thanks. Mention was made in several talks about the presence of neuron-like cells and activities occurring in the heart, the liver, and the gut. Perhaps these clues will be the beginning of a widening of scope in research attention (and funding) – expanding our attentions outward from the brain toward the study of the entire body as a conscious system, eventually expanding from there to include social structures, the species, etc. and expanding downward in organizational scale to the level of awareness in cells as well. Many delegates felt that our over-focus on the brain, while providing terrific new knowledge, suggests too small a definition of the central subject matter for which these conferences are intended. And many feel that without an understanding what is happening in terms of awareness at the scale of cells and social structures we will never comprehend what the brain is actually mediating between the two. Without a rational context of analysis the brain (and consciousness) will forever remain a mystery, thus giving rise to many forms of compelling but non-explanatory mystagoguery: quantum mysteries = consciousness mysteries, conscious mysteries = spiritual mysteries, spiritual mysteries = quantum mysteries, and so on. For the keynote address Sir Roger Penrose was magically floated into ring number three on a quantum mechanical cloud, untouched by modernity or commercialism or by the pre-emeritus strivings of ordinary academia, separated in time from the Chopra/Mlodinow antics, and unsullied by world-wide digital ubiquity (his presentation was prepared with multi-colored magic-markers via overhead projector). And much like some of the other physicists present, he seemed untouched by the point and purpose of the conference itself. He only had a sentence or two to spare for the subject of consciousness in a 90 minute ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 659 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth presentation which covered all of physics from the quantum to the cosmological, from the big bang to the final blip implosion. With childlike innocence and Penrosean charm he suggested that the final implosion would be a small event like a single mortar explosion that would fit into such a space as we had there in Aula Magna Hall, wherein “you all might all be affected” (i.e., destroyed) “but it would not be much of a noticeable event as far as the present universe was concerned”. Note taken! According to Penrose, all of physics (and thus reality) is computational, can be reduced to the methods and logic of mathematics except for a micro-millisecond of time-split that occurs before the moment of collapse in the quantum state. There, because the events and circumstances cannot be accurately computationally predicted, he allowed that consciousness could indeed come into play. In other words, if you cannot understand something computationally, well then… maybe this mysterious thing consciousness just might be the answer. Ergo, not only did our keynote speaker not present an actual theory of consciousness he revealed one of the most ungenerous acknowledgements of sentience in the living world. He only allows that it might exist in the one micro-millisecond pre-collapse event for which the mind of the materialist fails to find a mathematical solution. The impression given is that were there a bit of math for the quantum pre-collapse moment we would be gratefully relieved of the inconvenience of having to discuss consciousness at all. Were there no mystery in physics we would not need the mystery of consciousness. Clearly, for the physicist, reality does not need consciousness. Henceforth for this reviewer, the mind of physicists became the conundrum in question, the puzzle of all puzzles, the mystery of mysteries. Note to conference organizers: Though most delegates acknowledge the importance of understanding brain function, and though we see the remarkable way in which mathematics can be applied to problems in physics and logic, and though we applaud and support those who can do the important and necessary work performed via strict empirical method, many of the delegates do not see how numeric language, quantum processes, cosmological constants, and causal proofs, will ever be able to directly capture the meanings and purposes for which conscious experience arises in living systems. Math and physics may capture the laws of nature but not the inter-relative logic of living systems caught up within those laws ─ living systems for whom (and by whom) such laws are figured and formulated. Unlike other natural phenomena, one needs a wider conceptual approach for the subject of consciousness. The empirical model is insufficient. As even Penrose admitted, non-computational logic is fundamental to understanding our conscious condition. Perhaps in developing a science of consciousness the organizers are attempting to borrow legitimacy status from math and physics that have so dominated our description of realty for two centuries. But to move forward toward a science of consciousness me must countermand the scientific mind-set-of-the-moment, reduce its sway over our analysis, and forfeit its grip on our definition of reality in order to do the actual world-view-extending theoretical work required to properly orient a science of consciousness. This is not to say that other non-traditional points of view were underrepresented at the conference. They were not. In fact by proportion they probably outnumbered the traditional approaches two to one. But they were mostly relegated to the concurrent or poster level, merely given lip service at the plenary level, ignored in the keynote address, and given a pop-spirituality glister by the presence and voice of Deepak Chopra. To the credit of the organizers one did hear terrific arguments both for and against physicalism ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 660 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth itself. This gave thrill and seemed to touch upon the heart of the matter, bringing into clearer focus the odd relationship between the main-stage plenary presentations and the underbelly sideshow concurrent talks. Whereas most main-stage physicalists just assume their fundamental assumptions about reality are correct, Reinaldo Bernal, in a concurrent section on Materialism/Physicalism took time and great care to construct a convincing argument for physicalism‟s continued pragmatic use in an explanation of our conscious condition. Bernal‟s argument, based on the logical flaw inherent in the concept of intersubjectivity, was impressively wooing and deserves kudos. But then Kristjan Loorits‟ poster presentation emphasizing the inescapably abstract nature of physics and mathematics, quickly brought one back to one‟s anti-physicalist senses. And many other presenters (some explicitly, others obliquely) contributed to the delicious underlying conference-wide tension between physicalism and the yet-to-be-unified underground anti-physicalist resistance. Tarja Kallio-Tamminen in a plenary on Consciousness and Reality thankfully reminded us that despite great expectations, atomism, reductionism, and determinism turned out not to be universally applicable; that nature is not mechanical; and that knowledge, values, and goals are also intrinsic aspects of the fabric of reality. Jon Cape made a humorous and well-pointed case against the dominance of physicalism in his concurrent presentation entitled The Naked Emperor, which was written to honor the retirement of JCS‟s venerable managing editor Anthony Freeman who in 1993 wrote a similar critique of prevailing beliefs in his book God in Us. Anthony Freeman‟s unusual absence from this conference was as noticeable and as peculiar as was Deepak Chopra‟s unusual presence. And the qualitative significance of this altered quantum state took (and is still taking) a bit of digesting. I cannot emphasize enough how refreshing it was to see that many bold presenters were simply dispensing with physicalism‟s analytical constraints and getting on with the work of consciousness studies, without waiting for this central ideological issue to be publicly and finally resolved. A good example of this work was found in new approaches to the old mind/body problem, formerly the exclusive domain of philosophy. This hard-core hard problem inherent to the physicalist stance is now broached through an understanding of the brain mechanisms and mind behaviors responsible for the creation and maintenance of body-awareness and body-ownership. Valoria Petkova tackled this subject in a concurrent session on Body Consciousness and Henrick Ehrsson addressed it in a plenary session on Neural Correlates of Consciousness. Rather than distinctly separate entities, the mind and body must now be seen as fully-integrated inseparable aspects of a unified reality. The mind and the body necessarily reify one another. This inter-relational metaphorical ethos emerged as a common theme in many a presentation ranging from the psychological/sociological aspects of conscious experience to the proposed quantum-physical aspects of brain function. Laura Weed in her Jabberwocky-inspired poster presentation championed a new metaphysical grounding for the quantum interrelational characteristic, and she conjured the powers of Pierce, Maudlin, Ladyman, Ross, and van Fraassenish to bolster her case. “So, what is reality as described by the quantum world?” she asks, and then answers, “… it is a relational dance among very small and very large structures, mediated by observational perspectives and descriptive languages, whether information-theoretic, mathematical, or logical. What structures exist are themselves relational entities…” ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 661 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth What this reviewer realized anew in Stockholm is that the physicalist and anti-physicalist analytical routes toward a science of consciousness each come with their own unique worldview, and each result in drastically divergent explanations of what consciousness is and what reality is. The physicalist in general prefers to view consciousness as the product that we as possessors of physical brains produce in a physical world. But to enjoy this top-down, in-control view of cognition we must fully invest in the primacy of brains and in the sovereign reality of self-models. This investment results in an analysis that allows us to continue thinking of the empirically experienced products of those brains and self-models as equally sovereign, immutable, and absolutely true. In this version of consciousness and reality, the physical, measurable, quantifiable, empirical world is regarded as absolutely true (despite it being discredited within physics itself). Warning: Many physicalists may actually only experience the world as a physical system with measurable coordinates. It gives me shivers to think of it, but I suspect it must be so given the way some of them talk with such smug certainty about what can and cannot be known, what is and isn‟t real, what is science and what is nonsense, etc. The more flexible sort of physicalist will admit that the empirical world that we experience is not necessarily a correct correlation to what exists out there “but it is all we can know so what‟s the difference?” But if consciousness is instead seen through the eyes of anti-physicalists (i.e., characterized as a „symbiotic, emergent process‟ rather than a product) then the soup of experience we enjoy (the physics, spirituality, private thought, sensation, intuition, emotion, social structures, meanings, associations, purposes, etc.) all come out the other end of our analysis as merely useful constructs and NOT as absolute truths − mere qualia resulting from an appropriate interpretive-structural recipe that is only meant to result in a specific kind of useable world-model, the one that suits our unique purposes. In this scenario consciousness does NOT deliver freestanding truths and thus we can readily admit we are not separate enough from the experiential products of this process for us to accurately use the product (the empirically experienced world in particular) as the basis for understanding and measuring what consciousness is or is up to. And, the anti-physicalist will point out, this is not the end of the road of analysis (does not constitute cognitive closure). It is the beginning of many new forms of analysis that can do many wonderful things for us – particularly once we begin to recognize that all mental models are aligned with purposes for which they were created. When we glean the relationship between purposes and models we have a whole new ballgame (physical models of reality for physical purposes, spiritual models of reality for spiritual purposes, sociological models of reality for sociological purposes, and so on). But perhaps something of ingrained personal preferences will continue to inform our communal outlook. For those who constitutionally prefer the purposes of control and certainty the physical model is going to be their ticket to reality; and for those who constitutionally prefer to validate interrelational dynamics and meanings the anti-physical approach will be the obvious choice. Where does this superposition of purposes and worldviews leave us on the long and winding road toward a science of consciousness? As it stands, the dominant mind-set, informed by control and certainty (and inescapably fostering the rampant materialism that attends this ethic on the cultural level) continues to collapse reality toward its own shallow purposes, despite that these purposes no longer accurately represent a logically tenable worldview in the intellectual, social, psychological, emotional, economic, political, physiological, or ecological realms. Best we place our bets and hopes on the anti-physicalists whose high valuation of inter-relational ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 662 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth dynamics (over and above a valuation of objects, substances, and forces) holds out the only hope of transforming a radically fractured world into something more sustainable and ethically refined. Thus, instead of mere measurements, we must do the harder work of discerning how, why, in what way and for what purpose our experiences of reality (including the physical and spiritual models) are cognitively constructed from more fundamental aspects of awareness: from self-concepts in relation to world-concepts; from perspectival awareness based on the self/world inspired self-model formulation; from organic purposes facilitated by perspectival self-model awareness; from experiential dichotomies that emerge from the perspectival nature of self-models in order to serve self-models caught up in organic purposes, meanings, signals, signal concepts, etc . The harder work is all ahead of us and clearly it does not help to always defer to or refer to the physical world-model, nor to the logic of strict empiricism. We need an analysis utilizing an association of meanings, cognitive models, incremental adaptations of awareness in nature, inescapable imperatives of living systems, etc. The physical model of the world, so good for so many things, is not going to help us here so the assumptions about reality that our physicists assert are unhelpful. What became most apparent at this conference was how our communal notion of reality must be wrested from the physicists, like a rugby ball in play, and then refashioned and re-adapted to the tasks at hand – which are the tasks of understanding our conscious condition on its own terms (rather than in terms borrowed from physics or religion) and then evolving as a global culture utilizing this new form of self-and-world understanding. The implication of the underlying tension at this conference is that science, in its strict empirical methodological manifestation, can no longer be the sole arbiter of a reality that must now include our conscious condition as well as our physical (and/or spiritual) one. Thus we need to rethink what science is and how we wish to use it. The difference between the physicalist and anti-physicalist world-models can be used to define the direction of our modifications to the scientific endeavor. The science-defining metaphors must shift from physical causation (determinism) to process interrelation (holism). And fortunately, this is already occurring to people. “Science works very well as a social process when we can come together and find flaws in each other's reasoning. We can't find the problems in our own reasoning very well. But, that's what other people are for, to criticize us. And together, we hope the truth comes out," says Jonathan Haidt, in a recent interview with The Edge. This aptly describes the TSC conferences, at least from the perspective of the anti-physicalists. The problem and the tension is that the physicalists refuse to see that their empirical beliefs can also fall under the scope of critical scrutiny. And thus the odd disjunctive dynamic occurring on the high-wire at this conference would occur in and around any assemblage of physicalists and anti-physicalists. In general, the physicalist mounting the parapet and grabbing the swing in the middle of the big top is concerned with control and certainty and exhibits a strict devotion to a well-tested methodology based on doubt and mistrust. He or she tends to be an inflexible animal, impervious to new ideas and new approaches, smug in his or her certainty of the facts as they relate to his or her beliefs, which are not considered beliefs at all but hubristically touted as the „real deal‟ the only and absolutely true version of reality. In general, the anti-physicalist grabbing the swing at the short end of the tent, is motivated by and informed by an awareness of an inter-relational process-oriented reality (rather than a reality of objects and causal forces), is constitutionally open to new ideas and to alternative perspectives on old problems. He or she is pervious, flexible, willing to try any ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 663 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth new angle to see what can be worked from it. The close encounter mix of pervious and impervious animals at the Stockholm TSC produced a palpable field-tension of which only the pervious species was aware. Will these two animals meet in the middle, clasp paws, exchange momentum and go off together on a single swing, or will they … miss one another… again… with the physicalist swinging past the antiphysicalist, oblivious to his own role in the mishap, gleeful at the spectacle of the anti-physicalist falling heavily into the net below. The physicalist, discounting his or her own more subtle senses as quickly as he or she invalidates the sensibilities of others, easily disregards the significance of the trapeze-coordinating information he or she might receive were his or her beliefs broad enough to allow a non-causal impression to squeeze through and be registered as valid. The physicalist only sees one possible world-view with one small set of possible proofs while the anti-physicalist is open to as many worldviews as it takes, including the physical/empirical one, until the answer to a problem is meaningfully (rather than merely computationally) resolved. That, in a marshmallow circus-peanut nutshell, is what occurred on the high-wire at this conference. While the anti-physicalists are actually the more agile ones, they look less so because the physicalists, preening their stolid reputations for empirical excellence, yet unable to actually get a grip on the central subject matter of the conference, and unable to recognize the unusual skill of those who can get a grip, cannot coordinate their own efforts toward the tasks at hand. An expeditious way to correct this habitual misconnect would be for someone with a reputation in the sciences (Leonard Mlodinow, for example) to stand up and say something different about the relationship between consciousness and physics, acknowledging the ingrained cognitive structures of living systems as the source of physical models, and agreeing to look at these ingrained structures from a non-physical perspective. That would be a showstopper. Until then, if one can stomach the main-stage matter-versus-mystery antics as a necessary evil, reduce the overly brain-focused plenary activities to a consciousness-status/conference-legitimizing sideshow (while elevating in ones focus the varied and unexpected minutia on the peripheries) one can better intuit the underlying innovative impulses of the age and glean the potential future orientation of an emerging consciousness culture. Thus, at this conferences wisdom dictated one disregard the chunks of personality, reputation, and fame floating on the surface of the soup and look to the copious broth astir below in the non-brain-focused plenary talks and in the peripheral and plentiful concurrent sessions, workshops, posters presentations, and art installations, where alternative ideas about consciousness are explored in minutia from so many different angles as to cause the head to spin on both its lateral and vertical axis. At any rate, since the plenary speakers are likeliest to show up in the journals anyway, why renew your passport, stuff a suitcase, book a flight, and pay exorbitant conference fees and hotel rates just to glean what you can read at home. Down in the lower-level conference mix, the pitch and moment felt particularly ripe with possibility. Here one feels a sense of the urgency, seriousness, immediacy, ubiquity, and endless wonder of the subject matter. The multitude of experiential, philosophical, spiritual, biological, and non-material scientific approaches is rich indeed and ripe for anyone with an eye toward innovative cross-pollination. Combine the insights and concerns of any two presentations at the concurrent and poster level and you‟d ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 664 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth have an entirely new field of endeavor. And many a presenter already combined several approaches to great effect. Charles Whitehead explored altered states through the rubric of social anthropology and arrived at an inspiring formula for comprehending and applying the transformational spirit of communitas; Heather Christ correlated rigorous statistical analysis of spiritual intelligence to model more efficacious methods of spiritual leadership; Naama Kostiner combined neurophysiology with innovative narrative-based psychotherapeutic techniques to facilitate mind-expansion and to address drug addiction in a unique way; Marcelo Mercante combined altered states achieved through the use of ayahuasca in a ceremonial context to form an effective real-time on-the-ground clinical solution to drug addiction and alcoholism in Peru and Brazil. Imants Barušs (a long-time touter of physicalism‟s irrationality) applied empirical methods and flow charts to his own recent training in remote healing methodologies. And many others followed equally innovative paths for equally noble reasons. Peter Fenwick‟s two presentations of research into near death experiences (coincidentally scheduled at the start and finish of the conference) managed to calm the instinctual death-fears in even the most skeptical of us, and gave one and all cause to privately reconsider the possibility of an immortal conscious state. These were not the kinds of thoughts one had after Penrose spoke. In the great clashing mix of worldviews at this conference the underlying physical/anti-physical tension continually re-emerged. Can the physicists maintain their stranglehold on our global culture‟s understanding of reality or will a sufficient loosening of our over-dependence on measurement-based empirical certainty occur so that we can begin to accommodate the true nature of conscious experience on its own terms? As in the examples above, many presenters were doing their earnest best to accommodate the expectations of empirical science, applying clinical standards and quantifiable statistics to what would otherwise be distinctly separate unscientific endeavors. And many, driven by the kind of real-time concerns within the human condition that cannot await a full on transformation of the physicalist paradigm, are unapologetically cutting lose from the constraints of science and showing pragmatic results of alternative methodologies. One cannot help but admire the flexibility and dexterity of those who can adequately apply the grain of science to legitimize new fields of endeavor and analysis. And one cannot help but cheer on the sensible determination of those who are willing to go against the grain of science for the sake of more rapid progress in real-time social problems. One very present real-time problem for the science of consciousness is the question of what consciousness is. Neil Theise, in a concurrent session on panpsychism, made an astounding argument for the presence of sentience across many levels of organizational structure, from the quantum foam, to atoms, to cells, to organisms, to social units, to the ecosystem, to the universe. I say astounding with my tongue in my cheek because I made a similar argument in a poster presentation on the Origin of Cognition while intentionally limiting my analysis to living systems (from single celled organisms to human brains) in order to first comprehend how, why, in what context and in what character awareness arises in beings like us, before we can adequately approach the question of consciousness in quantum effects and cosmological properties. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 665 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 656-665 Holvenstot, C. Toward a Science of Consciousness 2011: The Greatest Show on Earth Theise‟s presentation brings up an important question that needs to be decided if we are to establish a unity of scope and terminology in the field of consciousness studies. Where does one draw the line for the use of the word “conscious”? Do we discuss, measure, and validate what awareness is doing in all living and an non-living systems or only discuss, measure, and validate what it is like to be conscious ourselves, focusing on the centrality and know-ability of human subjective experience? Can the same terms be used for both kinds of explorations? As possessors of brains, are we the makers of conscious experience or merely more articulate manipulators of conscious experience occurring in all living and non-living systems throughout the natural and physical world? Does ownership of brains and linguistically-enhanced self-reflexively self-aware self-models make us special? Do other animals with less complex brains and languages also enjoy equally vital conscious experience and abilities, subconscious archetypal worlds of dreamlike intensity, unconscious coordination of morphology, movement, and metabolism? Does over-focusing on the human brain cause us to lose more (in terms broad but vital analysis) than we gain (in terms of finer-tuned but uncontextualizable data)? A realitymodel confined to the empirically provable configuration-space constrains not only our imagination and opinions it renders incognizable everything about consciousness (and physics) that falls outside the causal-physical explanatory scope. In the face of such extensive creative enterprise and deep questioning occurring in the peripheries at this conference, the physicists and the strict empiricists looked a bit smug, shallow, and foolishly unaware. One foresees a future wobbliness in their currently firm footing. The strict empiricists continue to maintain their weightiness for the while, which is reflected in their dominance in the brain-scienceoriented plenary sessions, but something else of uncommon energy and momentum is certainly on the rise. Unfortunately the pride, certainty, and control responses of the strict empiricists prevent them absorbing these other more interesting perspectives. They do not show up to the concurrent sessions and poster talks where cross-pollinating anti-physicalist exchanges are steadily raising the level of creative inquiry. Though always present in some form at these conferences, in Stockholm the underdog undercurrent of the anti-physicalist resistance seem to have finally emerged in greater numbers and with a higher degree of communal impatience. Despite some P. T. Barnum-like self-marketing antics and the stark objective material monism of the physicists and brain scientists, if one arrived open-minded, open-hearted, intuitively attuned to the moment, and truly interested in witnessing a world of new ideas in their ideological and creative infancy, this conference in Stockholm was indeed the greatest show on earth. Nowhere else in the universe but at a TSC conference can one witness the showman and the shaman, the physicist and the psychic, the artist and the anesthesiologist, the social scientist and the spiritual leader, in all their varied and full-fledged beauty, busily expanding the cognitive territories on this wondrous new map of the human adventure. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 37-40 Richardson, D. Consciousness, Time, and Prespacetime as Consciousness Finds It to Be 37 Article Inaugural Issue Consciousness, Time, and Prespacetime as Consciousness Finds It to Be Dick Richardson ABSTRACT Everything communicates with us, a blade of grass, a tree, a river, a star, it all communicates with us. But folks seem to expect verbal communication. It is where their thinking and understanding is at. But that form of communication would be useless for we would not be experiencing it. FEELING it IS our communication with NO THING made. It has been said by others, and I found it to be true that only things in time and space which were not made in time and space can go back beyond time and space where they come from. They are things both of Time and Eternity, just as Consciousness is and just as Life is. Key Words: consciousness, prespacetime, eternity, feeling 1. Introduction1 My own field of analysis is that of consciousness studies, and the study of self. This really kicked off into a private passion back in 1941/42 at the mere age of three owing to spontaneous exceptional conscious experiences at that age. But one hardly had the wherewithal to get very far with it at that age. However, that line of personal (not academic) study intermingled with a great interest in physics by the age of twenty four when encountering a three hour spontaneous exceptional experience in which time and change did not feature. It went beyond time; beyond the personality and beyond the power to think or remember anything of this life here. It was then that I first wrote the sentence: `Once upon a Time there was a Time when there was no Time, and I was there'. This of course was all simply noted down as in a private diary of events, and never with any intentions of it being seen by anybody. The experiences were all so charged with a passion and delight, and to say nothing of revealing and life enhancing, that some time later I found myself writing poems of all these events from the age of three onwards. As if it was a kind of psychological regurgitation or discharge which would not let me drop it. One Correspondence: Dick Richardson West Somerset, UK E-mail: dick.richardson@ymail.com ISSN: day however, the poems (99 of them) were found by somebody and distributed by him (a member of MENSA) without my permission or knowing of it. That resulted in my receiving a telegram from The International Centre for Theoretical Physics in Trieste asking me to contact them and give them my telephone number and home address. On doing this the founder and director of it, Abdus Salam, requested a private day-long meeting in Oxford which we did. This culminated in him being the first to insist that I write all these things out again in prose; because he himself knew some degree of this himself but knew that there was more than he had found. I was very reluctant to do this, and saw no point in doing it. But over the months there came much pressure and persuasion from a number of sources, including Salam himself still. So I did. 2. The Understanding from Hindsight As a little boy I asked myself many question. For example, given that consciousness exists and is axiomatic and unarguable, then what exists for consciousness to become conscious of? Also, what is the real relationship between the observer and the observed? Even at the age of three I found myself asking the questions: What am I? Why am I here? Why am I me? Where do I come from and Why? I was not even aware then that Man had been asking Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 37-40 Richardson, D. Consciousness, Time, and Prespacetime as Consciousness Finds It to Be these same questions ever since we existed in caves. I could not even read at that age. The questions just came to me naturally, and I assumed every child asked them. However, with the then culmination of the timeless conscious experience, which I came to call, The Mystic Death and Resurrection Event, which itself was a reunion of two parts of myself, and via a third part of myself (the subconscious mind) and thus revealing three parts of our emanation, a Trinity of our being. So I discovered that we were constructed in a trinity of being, and that we were the link and the conduit between Time and Eternity. I use the word Eternity to mean not the sum of all time but the total lack of moving time and changing events. Hence Primordial Time and Primordial Consciousness – the ‘I AM’ which exists in Eternity. Before Time and Space was, I was there. Hence I also came to write the sentence: The Mind and Consciousness of Man are ever tied to the cross of Time and Eternity all due to experience, not theory or beliefs, or an idea, but by direct experience of those realms of BEING. None of it can be proved other than by way of living it. That is all the proof one needs. They were all axiomatic and unarguable, for one was THERE in them. And one existed in them and saw them all in a three dimensions each of a three dimensional structure of width breadth depth (and color). So, all this stuff exists for consciousness to become conscious of. So I think of that Eternity as like the analogy of a well or a spring, and from which Time and extended space emanate as like a flowing river from the inner dead central core of being, the spring of eternity. However, this was not all of it but only one half of it. Thus, at this point there was still an alienation and gap in comprehension. 3. The Later Unfolding of Awareness None of the findings thus far answered a thing about our relationship with objectivity and the world around us and the physical universe. For all that first twenty years of experience and inner learning was about ME, us, the human mind and what we are and what we are made of and from whence we come. But none of it was about the stuff `out there'. Neither was I ever expecting to find any such a connection. But I did, twenty years later and also spontaneously. ISSN: 38 This could be said to be the most profound event of all of it, and to my knowledge it has never ever been written about. It is the most profound in the sense that it knits it all together the outer with the inner and the observer with the observed. And there is no gap and there is no alienation of the parts, thus a union (not a reunion) with the observer and the observed, or subjectivity and objectivity, I and Thou. It all became one whole vortex of energy extending from a point of no duration and extension to encompass all space and time – like a dance or music. Even though the one wholeness was constructed into a duality of the observer and the observed, Consciousness has to have content. When writing this out in books as requested to do I received a number of death threats but not a jot in the way of thanks at that time. Not that I was looking for any thanks and the death threats did not bother me anyway for I was expecting hostility anyway. One is ridiculed by some people, by religions, by science and by psychology. So, one is really alone with this stuff. What I never came to write out was The Double Vortex Theory of Emanation. For if they could not even accept that then they would not even read this, so I never bothered to write it out. However, these things are not simply about the experience of them, nor about anything which one writes about them, they are plainly a living part in the shift of conscious awareness toward a new understanding and paradigm regard to the nature of our being, a new way of being in the world. A primordial innate drive which is an implicate order and a part of the unfolding in Time of what the principle and essence of it is in Eternity – in Prespacetime or Proto-Physics and Proto-Consciousness and LIFE. Life is not just about BEING it is also about BECOMING, and we are central to that process, because we are life, and consciousness flows through our being both in Time and in Eternity. The purpose is seen as being that of our own mind being central to the fulfillment of LIFE itself, not just us, Ab Aeterno Ad Hoc. Don't ask what life can do for you; ask yourself what you can do for it. The Mind and Consciousness of Man is the meeting ground of inner and outer dimensions. And only through ‘I’ can it be known. The observer is central to all that exists. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 37-40 Richardson, D. Consciousness, Time, and Prespacetime as Consciousness Finds It to Be One will not be loved for saying these things. Yet they are there to find, to live, to know and to understand. So, whilst the abuse and the death threats role on, one is living that new way of being in the world. And they cannot touch one and they cannot even find me for I am intangible unto the detection powers of the five external senses and the tools brought forth to enhance them. Thus it is the case that when physicists and mystics get together then all mayhem is let loose and the boats rock on the ruffled waves of convention, so it does. Maybe that is why they get us to write it instead of them for we are not important and can take it. 4. Scientific Proofs? At present, to the best of my knowledge, the scientific methodology and its tools cannot even find this, let alone prove it in some kind of repeatable experiment. What kind of science and potentials for studying phenomena will exist in a thousand year time? I have no idea and it is a waste of time guessing and guessing games are of no interest to me. But even now science has many axioms which it cannot prove, yet it fully accepts them added to which science looks `out there', not `in here'. They will not find me and consciousness out there. Personally I am a great fan and advocate of the scientific methodology, and all its investigations which it can get at and one day they will get us out there among the stars but not yet. However, what one has to keep in mind here is two things. One is that scientists are human beings and the other is that these things of which I speak are axiomatic and need no objective proof. So even a scientist on finding these things would neither need nor require objective proof. They all seem to overlook that fact as yet. But be that as it is what will science be able to get at in millennia to come? Who knows? I feel that they will come to realize the same as I did, and which brings us to one more topic – The Essence of No Created Thing. 5. The Untouchable Frontier This is an aspect of all this which I steer clear of, because in large part it is irrelevant even mentioning it. Thinking about it privately can help however. But please keep in mind that this is THINKING about stuff, not directly ISSN: 39 experience stuff. Although in other ways, it is partly experiential stuff, by way of FEEL. However, it would be so far out of the existing paradigm that it is not worth mentioning. But, let us have a go at it anyway. In my books (Richardson, 2003) there is a whole chapter devoted to Essences; and I cannot write all that again here. But this is also central to latent sensory enhancement of awareness and external sensory data or perception input – being aware of more both within us and all around us. I mentioned back when writing the initial exegesis that there was `something' about that eternal dimension of being which `was not there', yet could be known OF there and in a strange way FELT. So, whatever that uncreated `whatever' of NO THING would be independent of all things which exist is not only a silly question but it is an irrelevant one. It could never be answered or gotten. And yet in a way it CAN be gotten. Not in form but in Essence and in understanding, comprehension. In the second major event of my life which brought it all back to earth, what I call either The Reciprocal Convergence or the Consummation on Earth Event, one found the same `stuff and essence' OUT THERE as one found in the timeless domain IN THERE, in Eternity - the same thing. Not only was it in my own physical frame but in every phenomenon found to be out there in space and time. It was in ALL the things, all the forms. But at its centre there was this totally intangible Essential Quality and Principle. Could science ever possibly tap into that? I don't know, maybe, maybe not. I mentioned in my books (Id.) that everything communicate with us, a blade of grass, a tree, a river, a star, it all communicates with us. But folks seem to expect verbal communication. It is where their thinking and understanding is at. But that form of communication would be useless for we would not be experiencing it. But this way we are not only experiencing it but we are also FEELING it directly. That FEELING it IS our communication with NO THING made. It has been said by others, and I found it to be true that only things in time and space which were not made in time and space can go back beyond time and space where they come from. They are things both of Time and Eternity, just as Consciousness is and just as Life is. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 37-40 Richardson, D. Consciousness, Time, and Prespacetime as Consciousness Finds It to Be Will scientists ever come to know this? Yes, definitely, because they are LIFE. Will it be proved to them? Yes definitely because they are Life. Will they be able to prove it to anybody else by way of some kind of experiment and objective proof? I don’t think so; but in a million years time who knows. But I doubt it. And if they cannot then it would not make a jot of difference anyway. Even today they cannot prove that consciousness exists, yet that is all they ever know anything by way of and they accept it because it is axiomatic and uncontradictable. Personally (I could be wrong), I think that there will come a time when science does not try to prove everything especially that which is proved to them on the inside by experience. They will accept that parts of life and being are mysterious and leave it at that. Many years ago in the early books I made the prediction that there would always, 40 always be Mystery. One will just have to wait and see in eons to come. If I were to bet on it then I know my money would be safe for there are some things which can indeed be understood, but never gotten at. I cannot even get at a thought, and yet civilizations are built on them. Science works, so does Mystery for with a little mystery around one never ever stops wondering and that is good. Don't just aim for what you can get at, aim for the impossible, and that way the journey never ends nor the delight. And talking of essences the two best known triggers for instigating that journey back to beyond time are love and beauty. You cannot prove they exist either or me. Indeed, nearly all the best things in life cannot be proved to exist. Yet we still get on with it, and laughing as we go. References Richardson, D. The Mystical Gnosis Event (2003). See http://www.psychognosis.net and http://vixra.org/abs/0912.0058 ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 50 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness Article Inaugural Issue THE PRINCIPLE OF EXISTENCE: TOWARD A SCIENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS Huping Hu* & Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT In the beginning there was Consciousness by itself e0 =1materially empty and spiritually restless. And it began to imagine through primordial self-referential spin 1=e0=eiM-iM=eiMe-iM =e-iM/ e-iM = eiM/ eiM… such that it created the external object to be observed and internal object as observed, separated them into external world and internal world, caused them to interact through self-referential Matrix Law and thus gave birth to the Universe which it has since passionately loved, sustained and made to evolve. In short, this is our hypothesis of a scientific genesis (principle of existence). In this work, we shall lay out the ontological and mathematical foundations of a Consciousness centered quantum reality which shall include gravity and even spirituality. We will then discuss its implications and applications and make predictions etc. Key Words: consciousness, prespacetime, spin, existence 1. INTRODUCTION In Consciousness we seek The beauty and awe of what we have gradually discovered over the last several years or rather what Consciousness has revealed to us, submitters to truth, are so ecstatic that the first author has been struggling through days and nights to put them in proper written form (also see Hu & Wu, 2001-2009). In part, the breakthrough came as we struggled to find answers to fundamental questions posed by our own experimental results (Hu & Wu, 2006b, 2006c, 2006d & 2007a) that call for drastic changes in our own world view. However, we are aware that we can only strive for perfection, completeness and correctness in our comprehensions and writings because we ourselves are limited and *Corresponding author: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D. Address: QuantumDream, Inc., P.O. Box 267, Stony Brook, NY 11790, USA. E-mail: hupinghu@quantumbrain.org Note: This work was completed on December 21, 2009 and modified to this current version on December 21, 2009. The models and applications described in this work are the subject of a provisional patent application (App. No. 61/288333) filed with USPTO on 12/20/2009. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 51 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness imperfect. So, here we offer fellow truth seekers and our readers what we have comprehended and written with the caveat “we are imperfect but humble.” This work is organized as follows. In § 2, we shall use words and drawings to lay out the ontology of the principle of existence. In § 3, we shall express in mathematics the principle of existence in the order of: (1) scientific genesis in a nutshell; (2) self-referential Matrix Law and its metamorphoses; (3) additional forms of Matrix Law; (4) scientific genesis of primordial entities (elementary particles); and (5) scientific genesis of composite entities. In § 4, we shall discuss: (1) metamorphous transcendental view of the existence & the essence of spin; (2) the determinant view & the meaning of Klein-Gordon equation; (3) the meaning of Schrodinger equation & quantum potential; and (4) the third State of matter. In § 5 through § 8, we shall discuss weak, electromagnetic, strong and gravitational interactions respectively. In § 9, we shall focus on the essence of Consciousness (prespacetime) and the mechanism of human conscious experience. In § 10, we shall discuss some applications, make some predictions and pose and answer some anticipated fundamental questions related to this work. Finally, in § 11, we shall conclude this work. §11 are followed by a dedication, tribute, acknowledgments, a note and [self-] references. 2. ONTOLOGY In words and drawings we illustrate In the beginning there was Consciousness (prespacetime) eh by itself e0 =1materially empty and spiritually restless. And it began to imagine through primordial self-referential spin 1=e0=eiM-iM=eiMe-iM=e-iM/ e-iM = eiM/ eiM…such that it created the external object to be observed and internal object as observed, separated them into external world and internal world, caused them to interact through self-referential Matrix Law and thus gave birth to the Universe which it has since passionately loved, sustained and made to evolve. In this Universe, the Body of Consciousness (ether), represented by Euler number e, is the ground of existence and can form external and internal wave functions as external and internal objects (each pair forms an elementary entity) and interaction fields between elementary entities which accompany the imaginations of the Head h of Consciousness. The Body can be self-acted on by Consciousness’ self-referential Matrix Law LM. The Head h has imagining power i to project external and internal objects by projecting, e.g., external and internal phase +M =+(Et-p·x)/ħ above Body e. The Universe so created is a dual-world comprising of the external world to be observed and internal world as observed under each relativistic frame xµ=(t, x). In one perspective of transcendental view, the internal world (which by convention has negative energy) is the negation/image of the external world (which by convention has positive energy). The absolute frame of reference is the Body (ether). Thus, if Consciousness stops imagining (h=i0=0), the Universe would disappear into materially nothingness ei0=e0=1. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 52 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness The accounting principle of the dual-world is conservation of zero. For example, the total energy of an external object and its counterpart, the internal object, is zero. Also in this dual-world, self-gravity is the nonlocal self-interaction (wave mixing) between an external object in the external world and its negation/image in the internal world, that is, the negation appears to its external counterpart as a black hole visa versa. Gravity is the nonlocal interaction (quantum entanglement) between an external object with the internal world as a whole. Some other most basic conclusions are: (1) the two spinors of the Dirac electron or positron are respectively the external and internal objects of the electron or positron; (2) the electric and magnetic fields of a linear photon are respectively the external and internal objects of a photon which are always self-entangled; (3) the proton is likely a spatially confined (hadronized) positron through imaginary momentum (downward self-reference); and (4) a neutron is likely comprised of an unspinized (spinless) proton and a bound and spinized electron. In this dual-world, Consciousness is simply prespacetime having both transcendental and immanent properties/qualities. The transcendental aspect of consciousness is the origin of primordial self-referential spin (including the self-referential Matrix Law) and it projects the external and internal worlds through spin and, in turn, the immanent aspect of consciousness observes the external world as the observed internal world through the said spin. Human consciousness is a limited and particular version of this dual-aspect consciousness such that we have limited free will and limited observation which is mostly classical at macroscopic levels but quantum at microscopic levels. Before mathematical presentations, we draw below several diagrams illustrating the hypothesis of how Consciousness created the Universe comprising of the external world and the internal world (the dual-world) and how the external object and internal object and the external world and internal world interact. Figure2.1. Illustration of primordial phase distinction As shown in Figure 2.1, a primordial phase distinction (dualization), e.g., +M=+(Et-p·r)/ħ, was made in the Head h through imagination i. At the Body level, this is e0=eiM-iM=eiMe-iM=e-iM/ e-iM = eiM/ eiM…. The primordial phase distinction in Figure 2.1 is accompanied by matrixing of the Body e into: (1) external and internal wave functions as external and internal objects, (2) ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 53 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness interaction fields (e.g., gauge fields) for interacting with other elementary entities, and (3) self-acting and self-referential Matrix Law, which accompany the imaginations of the Head h so as to enforce (maintain) the accounting principle of conservation of zero, as illustrated in Figure 2.2. Figure2.2 Consciousness Equation Figure 2.3 shows from another perspective of the relationship among external object, internal object and the self-acting and self-referential Matrix Law. According to our ontology, self-interactions (self-gravity) are quantum entanglement between the external object and the internal object. Figure2.3 Self-interaction between external and internal objects of a quantum entity As shown in Figure 2.4, the two worlds interact with each other through gravity or quantum entanglement since gravity is an aspect of quantum entanglement (Hu & Wu, 2006). Importantly, the interactions within the external world obey classical and relativistic physical laws with influence of the internal world on external world shown as gravity macroscopically, quantum effect (e.g., quantum potential) microscopically, and light speed c as interaction speed limit, visa versa. Please note that, although in Figure 2.4 prespacetime is shown as a strip, both the dualized external world and internal world are embedded in prepacetime. The above ideas (ontology) were forced upon (or rather revealed to) us by our recent theoretical and experimental studies (Hu & Wu, 2006a-d, 2007a). Among other things, we experimentally demonstrated that gravity is the manifestation of quantum entanglement (Id.). We materially live in the external world but experience the external world through its ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 54 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness negation, the internal world in the relativistic frame xµ=(t, x) attached to each of our bodies. Interactions within the external world and the internal world are local interactions and conform to special theory of relativity. But interactions across the dual world are nonlocal interactions (quantum entanglement). Strong interaction is likely spatially confining nonlocal self-interaction and nonlocal interaction among spatially confined fermions (hadrons). Figure2.4 Interactions in the Dual-World Therefore, the meaning of the special theory of relativity is that the speed limit c is only applicable in each of the dual worlds but not interactions between the dual worlds. Indeed, the reason that no external object can move faster than the speed of light and the same gets heavier and heavier as its speed approaches the speed of light is due to its increased quantum entanglement with the internal world through its counterpart the internal object. 3. MATHEMATICS In mathematics we express 3.1 Scientific Genesis in a Nutshell It is our comprehension that: Consciousness = Prespacetime ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 55 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness =Omnipotent, Omnipresent & Omniscient Being = ONE (3.1) Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of primordial entities (elementary particles) in prespacetime, that is, within Consciousness itself, by self-referential spin as follows: 1 = e h = e i 0 = 1e i 0 = L1e −iM +iM = Le L−i 1 (e −iM )(e −iM ) → −1 (3.2) (LM ,e  Ae e −iM   Ae  −iM ψ e   LM ,i ) = L   e = L   = L M ψ = 0 M M A  −iM   i ψ i   Ai e  In expression (3.2), e is Euler number representing the Body (ether or aether) of Consciousness, h above e represents the Head of Consciousness, i is imaginary unit representing the imagination of Consciousness, ±M is content of imagination i, L1=1 is the Law of One of Consciousness before matrixization, Le is external law, Li is internal law, L is external matrix law, and L is internal matrix law, L is the self-referential M ,e M ,i M Matrix Law of Consciousness comprised of external and internal matrix laws which governs elementary entities and conserves zero, Ae e − iM = ψ e is external wave function (external object), Ai e − iM = ψ i is internal wave function (internal object)and ψ is the complete wave function (object/entity in the dual-world as a whole). Alternatively, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of primordial entities in prespacetime by self-referential spin as follows: 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e − iM + iM = (DetM E + DetM m + DetM p )(e − iM )(e − iM ) → −1 (LM ,e (3.3)  Ae e − iM   Ae  − iM ψ e   LM , i ) = L   e = L M  M   ψ  = L M ψ = 0 − iM   Ai   i  Ai e  where L0 is the Law of Zero of Consciousness as defined by fundamental relationship (3.4) below, Det means determinant and M E , M m and M are respectively matrices with p ± E , ± m and ± p as elements and E 2 , − m 2 and − p 2 as determinants. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 56 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness i0 Consciousness spins as 1=e =e iM-iM =eiMe-iM=e-iM/e-iM=eiM/eiM…before matrixization. Consciousness also spins through self-acting and self-referential Matrix Law LM after matrixization which acts on external object and internal object to cause them to interact with each other as further described below. 3.2 Self-Referential Matrix Law and Its Metamorphoses The Matrix Law L L = L of Consciousness is derived from the following ( M ,e M ,i ) M fundamental relationship: E 2 − m 2 − p 2 = L0 = 0 (3.4) through self-reference within this relationship which accompanies the imagination (spin i) in the Head. For simplicity, we have set c=1 in equation (3.4) and will set c=ħ=1 through out this work unless indicated otherwise. Expression (3.4) was discovered by Einstein. In the presence of an interacting field of a second primordial entity such as an electromagnetic potential A µ = (φ , A) , equation (3.4) becomes the following for an elementary entity with electric charge e: (E − eφ )2 − m 2 − (p - eA )2 = L0 = 0 (3.5) One form of the Matrix Law of Consciousness is derived through self-reference as follows:  E − m  − p  E 2 −m2   L =1= =  − p   E + m  p2   → −1 (3.6) −p −p E −m E −m = → − = 0 −p E +m −p E+m where p = p 2 . Matrixing left-land side of the last expression in (3.6) such that Det(LM ) = E 2 − m2 − p 2 = 0 so as to satisfy the fundamental relationship (3.4) in the determinant view, we have:  E −m   −p −p   = (LM , e E + m  LM , i ) = L M (3.7) Indeed, expression (3.7) can also be obtained from expression (3.4) through self-reference as follows: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 57 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  0 −p  0  −m 0    + Det   + Det − p 0 E  0 m   Matrixing expression (3.8) by removing determinant sign Det, we have: E 0 (3.8) 0 = E 2 − m 2 − p 2 = Det  0   −m 0   0 + + E   0 m   − p E  0 − p   E −m − p  =  = LM , e 0   − p E + m  ( LM ,i ) = L M (3.9) After fermionic spinization: p = p 2 = − Det (σ⋅p) → σ ⋅ p (3.10) where σ = (σ1, σ2, σ3) are Pauli matrices: 0 1  1 0 σ1 =  0 − i  i 0   σ2 =  1 0   0 − 1   σ3 =  (3.11) expression (3.7) becomes:  E − m − σ ⋅p    = LM ,e  − σ⋅p E + m  ( LM ,i ) = L M = E - α • p − βm = E − H (3.12) where α = (α1, α2, α3) and β are Dirac matrices and H = α • p + β m is the Dirac Hamiltonian. Expression (3.12) governs fermions in Dirac form such as Dirac electron and positron and we propose that expression (3.7) governs the third state of matter (unspinized or spinless entity/particle) with electric charge e and mass m such as a meson or a meson-like particle. Bosonic Spinization of expression (3.7) p = p 2 → s ⋅ p shall be discussed later. If we define:  E − m −σ⋅p   = ( E − m)( E + m) − (− σ ⋅ p )(− σ ⋅ p)  −σ⋅p E + m  Detσ  (3.13) We get: ( )  E − m −σ⋅p   = E 2 − m 2 − p 2 I 2 = 0  − σ⋅p E + m  Detσ  (3.14) Thus, fundamental relationship (3.4) is also satisfied under the determinant view of expression (3.13). Indeed, we can also obtain the following conventional determinant: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 58 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  E − m −σ⋅p   2 2 2  2  =  E − m −p  = 0 Det  −σ⋅p E + m      (3.15) One kind of metamorphosis of expressions (3.6) - (3.14) is respectively as follows:  E − p  − m  E 2 −p 2   = L =1=   − m  E + p  m 2    → (3.16) E − p E − p −m −m = → − = 0 −m E + p −m E + p  E− p   −m  −m   = LM , e E + p  ( E 0 0 = E 2 − m 2 − p 2 = Det  E  0 −1 LM , i ) = L M (3.17) −p 0  0 −m   + Det   + Det  E  −m 0   0 0   0 −m   − p + + E   − m 0   0 0   E−p = p   − m −m   E − σ⋅p  = (LM , e  E + σ⋅p   −m 0  p  −m   E + p  LM ,i ) = L M −m   E −σ⋅p  = ( E − σ ⋅ p )( E + σ ⋅ p) − (− m)(− m) E + σ⋅p   −m Detσ  ( ) −m   E − σ⋅p  = E 2 − p 2 − m 2 I 2 = 0 E + σ⋅p   −m Detσ  (3.18) (3.19) (3.20) (3.21) (3.22) Expression (3.17) is the unspinized Matrix Law in Weyl (chiral) form and it is connected to expression (3.7) by Hadamard matrix H = 1 1 1    : 2  1 − 1 (3.23)  E − m − p  −1  E − p − m  H =   H  − p E +m  −m E + p      Expression (3.20) is spinized Matrix Law in Weyl (chiral) form and it is connected to expression (3.12) by 4x4 Hadamard matrix: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 59 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness −m  (3.24)  E − m − σ⋅p  −1  E −σ⋅p H =   H  −σ⋅p E + m   −m E + σ⋅p     Another kind of metamorphosis of expressions (3.6) - (3.14) is respectively as follows:   − m − i p  E2 E  L = 1 = 2 2 =    − m + i p E m +p    → (3.25) − m −ip − m −ip E E = → − =0 E E − m + ip − m + ip − m −i p   = LM , e E   E   − m +i p  ( E 0 0 = E 2 − m 2 − p 2 = Det  E  0 −1 LM , i ) = L M  0 0  0 −m   + Det   + Det  E  −m 0  i p −i p   E = 0   − m + i p 0   0 −m   0 + + E   − m 0   i p − m −iσ⋅p  E    = LM , e E  − m + iσ ⋅p  ( (3.26) −i p   0  − m −i p   E  LM , i ) = L M E ( ) E − m −iσ⋅p   = E 2 − m 2 − p 2 I 2 = 0 E  − m + iσ ⋅p   Detσ  (3.28) (3.29) − m −iσ⋅p   = EE − (− m − iσ ⋅ p )(− m + iσ ⋅ p ) E  − m+iσ⋅p   Detσ  (3.27) (3.30) (3.31) Indeed, Q = m + iσ ⋅ p is a quaternion and Q∗ = m − iσ ⋅ p is its conjugate. So we can rewrite expression (3.29) as:  E  ∗  −Q −Q   = LM , e E  ( LM , i ) = L M Expression (3.26) is connected to expression (3.7) by unitary matrix ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.32) HS= 1 1 i :   21 −i JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 60 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  E −m − p   E − m −i p  (3.33) ( HS )−1 =   HS  E   − p E +m   − m +i p Similarly, expression (3.12) is connected to expression (3.29) by 4x4 matrix HS: E − m − iσ ⋅p   E − m − σ ⋅p   ( HS )−1 =   HS  E  − σ ⋅p E + m   − m + iσ ⋅p  (3.34) Yet another kind of metamorphosis of expressions (3.6), (3.7) & (3.12) is respectively as follows:  E + m   − p  −1 E 2−m2  L =1 = =   (3.35)  p2  − p  E − m  → −p −p E+m E+m = → − = 0 −p E −m −p E −m  E +m − p    = LM , e − p E − m   ( LM , i ) = L M  E+m −σ⋅p   = LM ,e LM ,i = LM = E − α • p + βm  −σ⋅p E−m ( ) (3.36) (3.37) If m=0, we have from expressions (3.6) - (3.14):  E  − p  E2  L = 1 = 2 =    p  − p  E  → (3.38) −p −p E E = → − = 0 −p E −p E  E  −p  −p   = LM ,e E  ( E 0 0 = E 2 − p 2 = Det  ISSN: −1 LM ,i ) = L M  0 0  + Det E −p −p   0  Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.39) (3.40) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 61 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness E  0 0  0 + E   − p −p   E = 0   − p −p   E  (3.41) After fermionic spinization p → σ ⋅ p , expression (3.39) becomes: − σ⋅p   E   = LM ,e LM ,i = L M − σ ⋅ p E   which governs massless fermion (neutrino) in Dirac form. ( ) (3.42) After bosonic spinization: p = p 2 = −( Det (s⋅p + I 3 ) − Det ( I 3 )) → s ⋅ p (3.43) expression (3.39) becomes: − s⋅p   E   = LM , e − s ⋅ p E   ( LM , i ) = L M (3.44) where s = (s1, s2, s3) are spin operators for spin 1 particle:  0 0 i   s2 =  0 0 0   − i 0 0    0 − i 0   s3 =  i 0 0   0 0 0   (3.45)  E − s ⋅p  = ( E )( E ) − (− s ⋅ p )(− s ⋅ p ) − s ⋅p E  (3.46) 0 0 0    s1 =  0 0 − i  0 i 0    If we define: Dets  We get:  E − s ⋅p Det s   2  p x  − s ⋅p  2  =  E − p 2  I −  p p  3  y x E     pz px  p p x y p2 y p p z y  p p  x z (3.47) p p  y z  p2  z  To obey fundamental relationship (3.4) in determinant view (3.46), we shall require the last term in (3.47) acting on the external and internal wave functions respectively to produce null result (zero) in source-free zone as discussed later. We propose that expression (3.39) ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 62 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness governs massless particle with unobservable spin (spinless). After bosonic spinization, the spinless and massless particle gains its spin 1. Another kind of metamorphosis of expressions (3.18) - (3.22) when m=0 is respectively as follows: E 0 0 = E 2 − p 2 = Det E  0 0  − p + E   0 −p 0  + Det E  0 0   E− p = p   0 0  p  0   = (LM ,e E + p  (3.48) LM ,i ) = L M 0   E −σ⋅p  = (LM , e  E + σ⋅p   0 LM , i ) = L M (3.50) 0   E −s⋅p   = (LM , e E + s⋅p   0 LM ,i ) = L M (3.51) 0   E −s⋅p  = ( E − s ⋅ p )( E + s ⋅ p ) E +s⋅p   0 (3.52) Dets   E − s ⋅p Dets   0 (3.49)  2  p x  0   2  =  E − p 2  I −  p p  3  y x E + s ⋅ p     pz px  p p x y p2 y p p z y p p  x z (3.53) p p  y z  p2  z  Again, we shall require the last term in expression (3.53) acting on external and internal wave functions respectively to produce null result (zero) in source-free zone in order to satisfy fundamental relationship (3.4) in the determinant view (3.52) as further discussed later. Importantly, if E=0, we have from expression (3.4): − m2 − p2 = 0 (3.54) Thus, if Consciousness allows timeless forms of Matrix Law, we can derive, for example, from (3.7) and (3.17) the following:  −m − p    = LM , e  − p +m  ( ISSN: LM , i ) = L M Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.55) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 63 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  − p −m    =  L  −m + p   M , e   (3.56) LM , i  = L M The above forms further degenerate, if m=0, as in the case of a massless particle. Further, if |p|=0, we have from expression (3.4): E 2 − m2 = 0 (3.57) Thus, if Consciousness allows spaceless forms of Matrix Law, we can derive, for example, from (3.7) and (3.17) the following: 0   E −m   = LM , e E + m   0 (  E −m   = LM , e   −m E  ( LM ,i ) = L M (3.58) LM , i ) = L M (3.59) The significance of these forms of Matrix Law shall be elucidated later. We suggest for now that the timeless forms of Matrix Law govern external and internal wave functions (self-fields) which play the roles of timeless gravitons, that is, they mediate time-independent interactions through space (momentum) quantum entanglement. On the other hand, the spaceless forms of Matrix Law govern the external and internal wave functions (self-fields) which play the roles of spaceless gravitons, that is, they mediate space (distance) independent interactions through proper time (mass) entanglement. The above metamorphoses of the self-referential Matrix Law of Consciousness are derived from one-tier matrixization (self-reference) and two-tier matrixization (self-reference) based on the fundamental relationship (3.4). The first-tier matrixization makes distinctions in time (energy), proper time (mass) and undifferentiated space (total momentum) that involve scalar unit 1 and imaginary unit (spin) i. Then the second-tier matrixization makes distinction in three-dimensional space (three-dimensional momentum) based on spin σ, s or other spin structure if it exists. 3.3 Additional Forms of Matrix Law If Consciousness allows partial distinction within first-tier self-referential matrixization, we obtain, for example, the following additional forms of Matrix Law L L =L : ( M ,e  E 2 −m2    −p ISSN:   E 2 − m 2  −p (3.60) 2 2   E −m  − σ⋅p  Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. − σ⋅p  E 2 − m 2  M ,i ) M (3.61) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 64 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 2 2   E −m − p  0   (3.62)  E 2 − m 2 − σ⋅p   2 2   E −m + p  0   (3.63)  2 2 E − m + σ⋅p  0 0  E 2 −p 2    −m   2 2 E −p   E 2 −p 2 − m   0  0   2 2 E −p + m  (3.65)  E   m 2 +p 2  − m 2 +p 2  (3.66)  E − m 2 +p 2   E 0     2 2 E + m +p  (3.67) −m (3.64)  E 2 − m 2 −p 2   0  0   E 2 − m 2 −p 2  0 (3.68) Bosonic versions of expressions (3.61) and (3.63) are obtained by replacing σ with s. If Consciousness creates spatial self-confinement of an elementary entity through imaginary momentum p i (downward self-reference such that m2>E2) we have: m 2 − E 2 = −p i2 = − pi2,1 − pi2, 2 − pi2,3 = (ip i ) = − Det (σ ⋅ ip i ) 2 (3.69) E 2 − m 2 − p i2 = 0 (3.70) that is: Therefore, allowing imaginary momentum (downward self-reference) for an elementary entity, we can derive the following Matrix Law in Dirac-like form:  E −m − pi    = (LM , e  − pi E +m  LM , i ) = L M (3.71)  −m   −σ⋅p i LM , i ) = L M (3.72) −σ⋅p i   = LM , e + m  ( Also, we can derive the following Matrix Law in Weyl-like (chiral-like) form:  E − pi   −m  E − σ ⋅p i   −m ISSN: −m   = LM , e + p i  ( −m LM ,i ) = L M   = (LM ,e E + σ ⋅p i  LM ,i ) = L M Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.73) (3.74) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 65 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness Bosonic versions of expressions (3.72) and (3.74) are obtained by replacing σ with s. It is likely that the above additional forms of self-referential Matrix Law govern different particles in the particle zoo as discussed later. 3.4 Scientific Genesis of Primordial Entities (Elementary Particles) Therefore, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave fermion such as an electron in Dirac form as follows: 1 = e h = e i 0 = 1ei 0 = Le −iM +iM = E 2 − m 2 −ip µ xµ +ip µ xµ e = p2 (3.75) −1  E − m  − p   −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ     e   − p  E + m   e      −1 → − p −ip µ xµ − p −ip µ xµ E − m −ip µ xµ E − m −ip µ xµ = − e e → e e =0 −p E +m −p E +m that is:  −ip µ xµ   E − m − p  ae , + e   →   = (LM ,e µ   − p E + m  a e −ip xµ   i,−  ψ  LM ,i ) e , +  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i , −   −ip µ xµ    E − m − σ ⋅p  Ae, + e  →   = (LM ,e µ  − σ ⋅p E + m  A e −ip xµ   i,−  ψ  LM ,i ) e, +  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i , −   (E − m )ψ e , + = σ ⋅ pψ i , −  or   ( ) E + m ψ = σ ⋅ p ψ i , − e , +    i∂ tψ e , + − mψ e , + = −iσ ⋅ ∇ψ i , −     i∂ tψ i , − + mψ i , − = −iσ ⋅ ∇ψ e, +  (3.76) where substitutions E → i∂ and p → −i∇ have been made so that components of LM t can act on external and internal wave functions. Equation (3.76) also has free spherical wave solution in the form: ψ e , +   S e , + e − iEt   = ψ =    S e − iEt  ψ  i,−   i,−  (3.77) Alternatively, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 66 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness fermion such as the electron in Dirac form as follows: ( ) 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e − iM + iM = E 2 − m 2 − p 2 e  E  Det   0   E    0   0 0  −m 0  + Det + Det E  0 m −p 0   −m 0   0  +  + E   0 m   − p − ip µ x µ + ip µ x µ = (3.78) −1 − p   −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ    e  e  →   0      −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ    − p   ae,+ e   E −m − p  ae,+ e     =  =0 µ µ   − p E +m  −ip xµ −ip xµ 0       ai,−e  ai,−e     −ip µ xµ     E − m − σ⋅p  Ae, + e  →   = LM ,e µ  − σ ⋅p E + m  A e −ip xµ   i,−  ( ψ  LM ,i ) e , +  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i , −  Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave antifermion such as a positron in Dirac form as follows: E 2 − m 2 + ip µ x µ − ip µ x µ h i0 i0 + iM − iM 1 = e = e = 1e = Le = e = p2 (3.79) −1  E − m  − p   + ip µ x µ  + ip µ x µ  −1    e  →  − p  E + m   e     − p + ip µ x µ − p + ip µ x µ E − m + ip µ x µ E − m + ip µ x µ e e → e e =0 = − −p E +m −p E +m + ip µ x µ    E − m − p  ae , − e   →   = LM , e µ + ip x µ − p E + m    a e  i,+  ψ  LM , i ) e , −  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i , +   + ip µ x µ    E − m −σ⋅p  Ae , − e  →   = LM , e µ  −σ⋅p E + m  A e + ip x µ   i,+  ψ e , −   = L M ψ = 0 LM , i ) ψ  i,+  ( ( or ( ) 0 = 0e h = 0ei 0 = L0 e −iM +iM = E 2 − m 2 − p 2 e ISSN: − ip µ x µ + ip µ xµ Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. = (3.80) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 67 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  E  Det    0   E    0  −1 − p   +ip µ xµ  +ip µ xµ    e  e  →   0       +ip µ xµ  +ip µ xµ    − p   ae,− e   E − m − p  ae,− e     =   =0  − p E +m +ip µ xµ +ip µ xµ 0        a e a e  i, +    i,+   0 0  −m 0   + Det   + Det  E  0 m − p 0  −m 0   0 + + E   0 m   − p  + ip µ x µ    E − m −σ⋅p  Ae , − e  →   = LM , e µ  − σ⋅p E + m  A e + ip x µ   i,+  ( ψ e , _   = LMψ = 0 LM ,i )  ψ  i,+  Similarly, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave fermion in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 1 = e = e = 1e = Le h i0 i0 −iM +iM E 2 −p 2 −ipµ xµ +ip µ xµ = e = m2 (3.81) −1 −1  E − p  −m   −ipµ xµ  −ip µ xµ     e  →  e    −m  E + p   E − p −ip µ xµ E − p −ipµ xµ −m −ipµ xµ − m −ip µ xµ e = e → e − e =0 −m E+ p −m E+ p  E− p →   −m −ip µ xµ   − m  ae ,l e    = (LM ,e µ  −ip xµ E + p     ai , r e  −ip µ xµ  − m  Ae ,l e   E − σ ⋅p  →   = (LM ,e µ −ip xµ E + σ ⋅p   −m   Ai ,r e  ψ  LM ,i ) e,l  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i ,r  ψ  LM ,i ) e,l  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i ,r  that is:  (E − σ ⋅ p )ψ e,l = mψ i ,r     ( E + σ ⋅ p )ψ i ,r = mψ e ,l  or  i∂ ψ + iσ ⋅ ∇ψ e,l = mψ i ,r   t e ,l   i∂ tψ i ,r − iσ ⋅ ∇ψ i , − = mψ e,l  (3.82) Alternatively, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave fermion in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 68 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e −iM +iM = (E 2 − m 2 − p 2 )e  E  Det   0   E   0  (3.83) = −1 0   −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ    e  e  → p     0 −p  0 −m   + Det   + Det  E  −m 0   0 0   0 −m   − p + + E   − m 0   0 −ip µ xµ + ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ  0   ae ,l e   E− p    =  µ −ip xµ p     −m  ai ,r e  −ip µ xµ   − m  Ae ,l e   E − σ ⋅p  →   = (LM ,e µ −ip xµ E + σ ⋅p   −m   Ai ,r e   −ip µ xµ  − m  ae ,l e   =0 µ −ip xµ E + p    ai ,r e  ψ  LM ,i ) e ,l  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i ,r  Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave fermion in another form as follows: −iM +iM 1 = e = e = 1e = Le h i0 i0 E2 −ip µ x +ip µ xµ = 2 2e µ = m +p (3.84) −1 −1   −m−i p   −ipµ xµ  −ipµ xµ  E −ip µ xµ E   e e → e =       −m+iε p  E   − m+ip     − m − i p −ipµ xµ − m − i p −ipµ xµ E −ip µ x e → e µ− e =0 E − m +ip E  −ip µ xµ  − m −i p  ae e   = (LM ,e µ  E  −ip xµ   ai e  ψ  LM ,i ) e  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i   −ip µ xµ  E − m −iσ ⋅p  Ae e    →  µ  = (LM ,e E  − m + iσ ⋅p  A e −ip xµ   i  ψ  LM ,i ) e  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i   E →   − m +i p  E →  ∗  −Q  − ip µ x µ  −Q  Ae e   = LM , e µ − ip x µ  E    Ai e  ( ψ  LM ,i ) e  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i  that is: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 69 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  Eψ e = (m + iσ ⋅ p )ψ i     Eψ i = (m − iσ ⋅ p )ψ e   i∂ tψ e = mψ i + σ ⋅ ∇ψ i     i∂ tψ i = mψ e − σ ⋅ ∇ψ i  or (3.85) Alternatively, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave fermion in another form as follows: 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e −iM +iM = (E 2 − m 2 − p 2 )e 0  0  0 −m   + Det   + Det  E  −m 0  i p  E  Det   0  0   0 −m   0 + + E   − m 0   i p  E   0   −ip µ xµ   E − i p   a e e    =  µ  0   −ip xµ   − m + i p  ai e  (  − ip µ x µ  −Q  Ae e   = LM , e µ − ip x µ  E    Ai e  ( = −1 −i p   −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ    e  e  → 0     − ip µ x µ   E − m −iσ ⋅p  Ae e    →  µ  = LM , e E  − m + iσ ⋅p  A e − ip x µ   i   E →  ∗  −Q −ip µ xµ +ip µ xµ µ − m − i p  ae e −ip xµ   =0 −ip µ xµ  E    ae  i  ψ  LM , i ) e  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i  ψ  LM , i ) e  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i  (3.86) Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a linear plane-wave photon as follows: 1 = e = e = 1e = Le h i0 i0 − iM + iM E 2 − ip µ x µ + ip µ x µ = 2e = p (3.87) −1  E  − p   − ip µ x µ  − ip µ x µ     e   − p  E   e      −1 → E − ip µ x µ − p − ip µ x µ E − ip µ x µ − p − ip µ x µ e = e → e − e =0 −p E −p E ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 70 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  E →  − p −ip µ xµ   − p  ae , + e    = LM ,e µ  −ip xµ E    ai , − e  (  −ip µ xµ  − s ⋅p  E 0 e, + e   E  →   = LM ,e µ −ip xµ E   − s ⋅p   iB 0i,- e  ( ψ  LM ,i ) e,+  = L M ψ = 0  ψ i,−    ψ  LM ,i ) e , +  = L M ψ photon = 0 ψ i , −  Alternatively, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of the linear plane-wave photon as follows: 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e −iM +iM = (E 2 − p 2 )e  E   0  −ip µ xµ +ip µ xµ − p   −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ    e  e  0      E  Det   0  0  0  + Det  E − p 0  0 + E   − p  −ip µ xµ  − p   a e , + e   E    =  µ −ip xµ 0    −p  ai , − e  −ip µ xµ   − s ⋅p  E 0 e, + e   E  →   = LM ,e µ −ip xµ E   − s ⋅p   iB 0i,- e  This photon wave function can be written as: ( = (3.88) −1 →  −ip µ xµ  − p  a e , + e   =0 µ −ip xµ E    ai , − e  ψ  LM ,i ) e, +  = L M ψ photon = 0 ψ i , −  − i (ωt − k ⋅ x )   E 0  − i (ωt −k ⋅ x ) ψ e, +   E   E 0 e      ψ photon =   =  iB  =  iB e − i (ωt −k ⋅ x )  =  iB 0 e ψ  i,−     0    (3.89) After the substitutions E → i∂ t and p → −i∇ , we have from the last expression in (3.87): is ⋅ ∇  E   i∂  ∂ E = ∇×B   t   = 0 →  t   is ⋅ ∇ i∂ t  iB   ∂ t B = −∇ × E  (3.90) where we have used the relationship s ⋅ (− i∇ ) = ∇ × to derive the latter equations which together with ∇ ⋅ E = 0 and ∇ ⋅ B = 0 are the Maxwell equations in the source-free vacuum. Consciousness creates a neutrino in Dirac form, if Consciousness does, by replacing the last step of expression (3.87) with the following: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 71 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness − ip µ x µ   −σ⋅p  ae, + e   E  →   = LM , e µ − ip x µ E   −σ⋅p   ai , − e  ψ  (3.91) LM , i ) e,+  = L M ψ = 0 ψ  i,− (   Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a linear plane-wave antiphoton as follows: 1 = e h = ei 0 = 1e i 0 = Le − iM + iM = E 2 − ip µ x µ + ip µ x µ e = p2 (3.92) −1  E  − p   + ip µ x µ  + ip µ x µ     e   − p  E   e     −1 → E + ip µ x µ − p + ip µ x µ E + ip µ x µ − p + ip µ x µ e e → e e =0 = − E E −p −p  E →  −p − p ψ e , −    = (LM , e E ψ i , +   + ip µ x µ  − s ⋅p  iB 0 e , − e   E  →   = (LM , e µ + ip x − s ⋅ p E µ   E e   0i , +  ψ  LM , i ) e , −  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i , +  ψ  LM ,i ) e , −  = L M ψ antiphoton = 0 ψ i , +  This antiphoton wave function can also be written as: i ( ωt − k ⋅ x )   iB 0  i (ωt − k ⋅ x ) ψ e, −   iB   iB 0 e =   =   = ψ antiphoton =  i ( ωt − k ⋅ x )  E 0 e   ψ E e E i , +       0   (3.93) Consciousness creates an antineutrino in Dirac form, if Consciousness does, by replacing the last step of expression (3.93) with the following: + ip µ x µ   −σ⋅p  ae , − e   E  →   = LM , e µ + ip x µ E   −σ⋅p   ai , + e  ( ψ  LM , i ) e,−  = L M ψ = 0 ψ  i ,+  (3.94)  Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of chiral plane-wave photons as follows: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 72 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e −iM +iM = (E 2 − p 2 )e  E  Det   0   E   0  0  −p  + E   0 0 −p  + Det  E  0 −ip µ xµ +ip µ xµ 0   −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ    e  e  p     −ip µ xµ   0   ae ,l e   E− p    =  µ −ip xµ p     0  ai ,r e  = (3.95) −1 → −ip µ xµ   0  ae ,l e   =0 µ −ip xµ E + p    a i ,r e  −ip µ xµ   0  Ae ,l e   E − s ⋅p  →   = (LM ,e µ −ip xµ E + s ⋅p   0   Ai ,r e  ψ e,l   = LMψ = 0  ψ i ,r  LM ,i ) that is, ψ e,l and ψ i, r are decoupled from each other and satisfy the following equations respectively:  (E − s ⋅ p )ψ e ,l = 0  or  ∂ tψ e,l + s ⋅ ∇ψ e,l = 0      ∂ ψ − s ⋅ ∇ ψ = 0 ( ) E + s ⋅ p ψ = 0 i ,r i ,r  t i ,r    which have the following respective solutions: ( ( ) ) i (ωt −k ⋅x )  ψ e ,l   E + iB   E 0 + iB 0 e   =  ψ =  = i (ωt −k ⋅x )   ψ E − i B e E − i B   0 0  i ,r    Both ∂ ψ t e ,l (3.96) (3.97) + s ⋅ ∇ψ e,l = 0 and ∂ tψ i ,r − s ⋅ ∇ψ i ,r = 0 produce the Maxwell equation in the source-free vacuum as shown in the second expression of (3.90). Consciousness creates neutrinos in Weyl (chiral) forms, if Consciousness does, by replacing the last step of expression (3.95) with the following: −ip µ xµ   0  Ae,l e   E −σ ⋅p  →   = (LM ,e µ −ip xµ E +σ ⋅p   0   Ai ,r e  (3.98) ψ e,l   = LMψ = 0  ψ i ,r  LM ,i ) that is, ψ e,l and ψ i, r are decoupled from each other and satisfy the following equations respectively:  (E − σ ⋅ p )ψ e,l = 0    ( ) E + σ ⋅ p ψ = 0 i , r   or  ∂ tψ e,l + σ ⋅ ∇ψ e,l = 0    ψ σ ψ 0 ∂ − ⋅ ∇ = t i , r i , r   (3.99) Consciousness likely creates and sustains timeless (instantaneous) external and internal wave functions (timeless graviton) of a mass m in Dirac form as follows: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 73 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 1 = e = e = 1e = Le h i0 i0 − m 2 −iM +iM = 2 e = p −iM +iM (3.100) −1  − m  − p  −iM −iM −1    − p  + m  (e )(e ) →    − m −iM − p −iM − m −iM − p −iM e = e → e − e =0 −p +m −p +m  − m − p  g D ,e e −iM    = L  →  −iM   M,e  − p + m  g D ,i e    VD ,e  = L V = 0 M D M , i  VD ,i  L We will determine the form of imaginary content M in expression (3.100) later. Alternatively, Consciousness likely creates and sustains timeless (instantaneous) external and internal wave functions (timeless graviton) of a mass m in Dirac form as follows: ( ) 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e −iM +iM = m 2 −p 2 e −iM +iM =  −m 0   0  Det   + Det    0 +m  −p    −m 0   0   0 + m  +  − p    (3.101) − p   −iM −iM −1  e e → 0   ( )( − p   g D ,e e −iM   − m =   0   g D ,i e −iM   − p ) − p  g D ,e e −iM  =0  + m  g D ,i e −iM  Similarly, Consciousness likely creates and sustains timeless (instantaneous) external and internal wave functions (timeless graviton) of a mass m in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 1 = e h = e i 0 = 1e i 0 = Le −iM +iM = − m 2 −iM +iM e = p2 (3.102) −1  − p  − m  −iM −iM −1  (e )(e ) →    − m + p    − p −iM − m −iM − p −iM − m −iM e = e → e − e =0 −m +p −m +p  − p − m  gW ,e e −iM   = LM ,e  →  −iM    − m + p  gW ,i e  (  VW ,e   = L M VW = 0 LM ,i    VW ,i  ) Again, we will determine the form of the imaginary content M in expression (3.102) later. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 74 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness Alternatively, Consciousness likely creates and sustains timeless (instantaneous) external and internal wave functions (timeless graviton) of a mass m in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: ( ) 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e −iM +iM = m 2 −p 2 e −iM +iM =  −p  Det   0    − p   0  (3.103) 0   0 − m   −iM −iM −1  + Det  e →  e +p   −m 0   ( )( 0   0 − m   gW ,e e −iM   − m = +   + p   − m 0   gW ,i e −iM   − p ) − p  gW ,e e −iM  =0  + m  g w ,i e −iM  Consciousness likely creates and sustains spaceless (space/distance independent) external and internal wave functions of a mass m in Dirac form as follows: 0 = 0e = 0e = L0 e h  E  Det  0   E    0 0 −iM +iM ( ) −imt +imt = = E 2 −m2 e (3.104) 0  − m 0   −imt −imt −1 e →  + Det    e E  0 +m ( )( 0   − m 0   g D ,e e −imt   E − m = +   E   0 + m   g D ,i e −imt   0 ) 0  g D ,e e −imt  =0  E + m  g D ,i e −imt  Similarly, Consciousness likely creates and sustains spaceless (space/distance independent) external and internal wave functions of a mass m in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 1 = e = e = 1e = Le h 0 0 E 2 −imt + imt = 2e = m −iM + iM (3.105) −1  E  − m  ( −imt )( −imt )−1 e →    e  − m  E  E −imt − m −imt E −imt − m −imt e = e → e − e =0 −m E −m E  E − m  gW ,e e −imt   →  = L M ,e −imt   − m E  gW ,i e  (  VW ,e   = L M VW = 0 LM ,i    VW ,i  ) Alternatively, Consciousness likely creates and sustains spaceless (space/distance ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 75 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness independent) external and internal wave functions of a mass m in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 0 = 0e = 0e h i0 = L0 e − iM + iM ( ) − imt + imt = = E 2 −m2 e (3.106)   −E  Det   0   E    0 0   0 − m   − imt − imt −1 e →  + Det    e +E  − m 0   ( )( ) 0   0 − m   gW , e e − imt   E − m  gW , e e − imt  = =0   +   E   − m 0   gW , i e − imt   − m E  g w, i e − imt  Consciousness likely creates, sustains and causes evolution of a spatially self-confined entity such as a proton through imaginary momentum p i (downward self-reference such that m2>E2) in Dirac form as follows: 1 = e = e = 1e = Le h i0 i0 +iM −iM E 2 − m 2 +ip µ xµ −ip µ xµ = e = p i2 (3.107) −1  E − m  − p i   +ip µ xµ  +ip µ xµ     e   − p  E + m   e      i   −1 → − p i +ip µ xµ E − m +ip µ xµ E − m +ip µ xµ − p i +ip µ xµ = − e e → e e =0 − pi E+m − pi E+m  E − m − p i  se , − e +iEt  ψ   = (LM ,e LM ,i ) e , −  = L M ψ = 0  →  iEt +  ψ     − p i E + m  s i , + e   i,+  After spinization of expression (3.108), we have: ψ e , −   E − m − σ ⋅p i  S e , − e +iEt    = LM ψ = 0  →  = L L M ,e M ,i  +iEt    ψ − σ ⋅ p E + m S e   i , + i  i,+   ( ) (3.108) (3.109) As discussed later, it is likely that expression (3.108) governs the confinement structure of the unspinized proton in Dirac form through imaginary momentum p i and, on the other hand, expression (3.109) governs the confinement structure of spinized proton through p i . Alternatively, Consciousness likely creates, sustains and causes evolution of the spatially self-confined entity such as a proton in Dirac form as follows: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 76 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e iM −iM = (E 2 − m 2 − p i2 )e E Det  0  E   0  0   0  −m 0   +  Det   + Det  E   0 m  − pi 0   −m 0   0 + + E   0 m   − p i +ip µ xµ −ip µ xµ = − p i   +ip µ xµ  +ip µ xµ    e  e  0     − p i   se , − e +iEt   E − m =   0   si , + e +iEt   − p i ψ D ,e   = LM ψ D = 0 LM ,i   ψ D ,i  −σ ⋅p i  S e, − e +iEt   = LM ,e  E + m  S i , + e +iEt  ψ D ,e   = LM ψ D = 0 LM ,i   ψ D , i    E −m →   −σ⋅p i ( −1 → − p i  se , − e +iEt  =0  E + m  si , + e +iEt   E − m − p i  se, − e +iEt    →   s e +iEt  = LM ,e − p E + m i   i , +  ( (3.110) ) ) Thus, an unspinized and spinized antiproton in Dirac form may be respectively governed as follows:  E − m − p i  se, + e −iEt  ψ  (3.111)  = (LM ,e LM ,i ) D ,e  = L M ψ D = 0   − iEt  −p     E + m  si , − e i  ψ D ,i    E −m   −σ ⋅p i ψ D ,e   = LM ψ D = 0 LM ,i   ψ D ,i  −σ ⋅p i  S e , + e −iEt   = LM ,e  E + m  S i , − e −iEt  ( ) (3.112) Similarly, Consciousness likely creates, sustains and causes evolution of a spatially self-confined entity such as a proton through imaginary momentum p i (downward self-reference) in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 1 = e = e = 1e = ( L )m e h i0 i0 +ip µ xµ −ip µ xµ E 2 − p i2 +ip µ xµ −ip µ xµ = e = m2 (3.113) −1  E − p i  − m   +ip µ xµ  +ip µ xµ  −1  e    e  →     − m  E + p i   E − p i +ip µ xµ E − p i +ip µ xµ − m +ip µ xµ M − m +ip µ xµ e = e → e − e =0 −m E + pi −m E + pi − m  se,r e +iEt   E − pi ψ   = (LM ,e LM ,i ) e ,r  = L M ψ = 0  →  + iEt ψ   E + p i  si ,l e  −m  i ,l   After spinization of expression (3.114), we have: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.114) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 77 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness ψ  − m  S e ,r e +iEt   E −σ ⋅p i (3.115)  = LM ,e LM ,i  e ,r  = L M ψ = 0  →  + iEt ψ   E + σ⋅p i  S i ,l e  −m  i ,l   It is likely that expression (3.114) governs the structure of the unspinized proton in Weyl form and expression (3.115) governs the structure of spinized proton in Weyl form. ( ) Alternatively, Consciousness likely creates, sustains and causes evolution of a spatially self-confined entity such as a proton in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 0 = 0e h = 0e i 0 = L0 e iM −iM = (E 2 − m 2 − p i2 )e  E  Det   0   E   0  0  − pi  + Det  E  0 +ip µ xµ −ip µ xµ = (3.116) −1 0   0 − m   +ip µ xµ  +ip µ xµ   + Det    e  e  → + p i     − m 0   0   − pi + E   0 0   0 − m   se ,r e +iEt   E − p i = +   + p i   − m 0   si ,l e +iEt   − m  E − pi →   −m − m  se,r e +iEt   = LM ,e  E + p i  si ,l e +iEt   E −σ ⋅p i →   −m − m  S e ,r e +iEt   = LM ,e  E + σ⋅p i  S i ,l e +iEt  ( ( − m  se ,r e +iEt  =0  E + p i  si ,l e +iEt  ψ e ,r   = L M ψ = 0 LM ,i  ψ  i ,l  ) ψ e ,r   = L M ψ = 0 LM ,i  ψ i , l   ) (3.117) (3.118) Thus, an unspinized and spinized antiproton in Weyl form may be respectively governed as follows:  E − pi − m  se,l e −iEt  ψ  (3.119)  = LM ,e LM ,i  e ,l  = LM ψ = 0   iEt −  −m    E + p i  si ,r e   ψ i ,r  (  E −σ⋅p i   −m − m  S e ,l e −iEt   = (LM ,e  E + σ⋅p i  S i ,r e −iEt  ) ψ e,l   = LM ψ = 0 LM ,i )  ψ i ,r  (3.120) 3.4 Scientific Genesis of Composite Entities Then, Consciousness may create, sustain and cause evolution of a neutron in Dirac form which is comprised of an unspinized proton:   E −eφ − m − p i −eA  se, − e +iEt         − p i −eA E −eφ + m  s e +iEt  = 0    i , +    p (3.121) and a spinized electron: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 78 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness   E + eφ −V − m − σ ⋅(p + eA )  S e, + e −iEt         S e −iEt  = 0  ( ) − σ ⋅ p + e A E + e φ − V + m    i,−   e (3.122) as follows: 1 = e h = e i 0 e i 0 = 1e i 01e i 0 = (Le −iM +iM )p (Le −iM +iM )e (3.123)  E 2 − m 2 +ip µ xµ −ip µ xµ   E 2 − m 2 −ip µ xµ +ip µ xµ  = e e    = 2 2 e  pi p p   E − m  − p i  −1  +ip µ xµ  +ip µ xµ  −1    E − m  − p  −1  −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ  −1       e      e    E + m   e   − p i  E + m   e − p       e      p − p −ip µ xµ   E − m +ip µ xµ − p i +ip µ xµ   E − m −ip µ xµ → = = e e e e    E +m E +m  − pi p −p e   E − m −ip µ xµ − p −ip µ xµ   E − m +ip µ xµ − p i +ip µ xµ → e − e = 0  e − e = 0 E +m E +m  − pi p −p e   E − m − p i  se, − e +iEt     E − m − p  se, + e −iEt   =0    =0    →     − p i E + m  s e +iEt     − p E + m  s e −iEt   i , i , + −   p   e     E − eφ − m − p i − eA  s e, − e +iEt      =0   + iEt       − p i − eA E − eφ + m  si , + e   p   →     E + eφ −V − m − σ ⋅(p + eA )  S e −iEt      e , + −iEt  = 0       − σ ⋅(p + eA ) E + eφ −V + m  S i , − e   e  n  In expressions (3.121), (3.122) and (3.123), ( ) , ( ) and ( ) indicate proton, electron p e n and neutron respectively. Further, unspinized proton has charge e, electron has charge –e, (Aµ = (φ , A) ) and (Aµ = (φ , A)) are the electromagnetic potentials acting on unspinized p e proton and tightly bound spinized electron respectively, and (V ) is a binding potential from e the unspinized proton acting on the spinized electron causing tight binding as discussed later. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 79 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness ( ) If A µ = (φ , A ) is negligible due to the fast motion of the tightly bound spinized electron, p we have from the last expression in (3.123):    E − m − p i  se , − e +iEt          0 =    − p i E + m  si , + e +iEt    p   →     E + eφ −V − m − σ ⋅(p + eA )  S e −iEt     =0     e , +    − σ ⋅(p + eA ) E + eφ −V + m  S i , − e −iEt    e n  (3.124) Experimental data on charge distribution and g-factor of neutron seem to support a neutron comprising of an unspinized proton and a tightly bound spinized electron. The Weyl (chiral) form of the last expression in (3.123) and expression (3.124) are respectively as follows:    − eφ − p i − eA  −m  se ,r e +iEt     =0  + iEt        −m − eφ + p i − eA  si ,l e  p        E + eφ −V − σ ⋅(p + eA )  S e ,l e −iEt    −m   =0     −iEt    ( ) m E e V e − + φ − + σ ⋅ p + A S e  i , r   e  n     E − pi  − m  se ,r e +iEt      =0   iEt +        − m  E + p i  si ,l e  p     −iEt    E + eφ −V − σ ⋅(p + eA ) −m  S e ,l e     =0   −iEt    ( ) φ σ p A m E e V e − + − + ⋅ + S e   i ,r   e  n  (3.125) (3.126) Then, Consciousness may create, sustain and cause evolution of a hydrogen atom comprising of a spinized proton:   E −eφ − m −σ⋅(p i −eA )  S e, − e +iEt          −σ⋅(p i −eA ) E − eφ + m  S e +iEt  = 0  i , +    p (3.127) and a spinized electron:   E + eφ − m − σ ⋅(p + eA )  S e , + e − iEt          − σ ⋅(p + eA ) E + eφ + m  S e − iEt  = 0   i,−   e (3.128) in Dirac form as follows: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 80 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 1 = e h = e i 0 e i 0 = 1e i 01e i 0 = (Le −iM +iM )p (Le −iM +iM )e (3.129)  E 2 − m 2 +ip µ xµ −ip µ xµ   E 2 − m 2 −ip µ xµ +ip µ xµ  = e e    = 2 2 e  pi p p   E − m  − p i  −1  +ip µ xµ  +ip µ xµ  −1    E − m  − p  −1  −ip µ xµ  −ip µ xµ  −1       e  e      e     − p i  E + m   e    p   − p  E + m     e  − p −ip µ xµ   E − m +ip µ xµ − p i +ip µ xµ   E − m −ip µ xµ → e = e e = e    E +m E +m  − pi p −p e   E − m −ip µ xµ − p −ip µ xµ   E − m +ip µ xµ − p i +ip µ xµ → e − e = 0  e − e = 0 E +m E +m  − pi p −p e   E − m − p i  se, − e +iEt     E − m − p  se, + e −iEt   =0    =0    →     − p i E + m  s e +iEt     − p E + m  s e −iEt    i ,+  p  i ,−  e     E − eφ − m −σ ⋅(p i − eA ) S e , − e +iEt     =0       −σ ⋅(p i − eA ) E − eφ + m  S i , + e +iEt    p   →     E + eφ − m − σ ⋅(p + eA )  S e −iEt    =0     e, +    − σ ⋅(p + eA ) E + eφ + m  S i , − e −iEt    e h  In expressions (3.127), (3.128) and (3.129), ( ) p , ( )e and ( )h indicate proton, electron and hydrogen atom respectively. Again, proton has charge e, electron has charge –e, and (Aµ = (φ , A)) and (Aµ = (φ , A)) are the electromagnetic potentials acting on spinized p e proton and spinized electron respectively. ( ) Again, if A µ = (φ , A ) p is negligible due to fast motion of the orbiting spinized electron, we have from the last expression in (3.129): ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 81 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness    E − m −σ ⋅p i  S e, − e +iEt          = 0    −σ ⋅p i E + m  S i , + e +iEt    p   →     E + eφ − m − σ ⋅(p + eA )  S e −iEt    =0     e , +    − σ ⋅(p + eA ) E + eφ + m  S i , − e −iEt    e h  (1.130) The Weyl (chiral) form of the last expression in (3.129) and expression (3.130) are respectively as follows: +iEt    E − eφ − σ ⋅(p i − eA ) −m  S e ,r e      =0    −m E − eφ + σ ⋅(p i − eA )  S i ,l e +iEt    p     −iEt    E + eφ − σ ⋅(p + eA )    −m  S e ,l e      =0  −iEt     ( ) m E e e − + φ + σ ⋅ p + A S e   i ,r  e h     E − σ ⋅p i  − m  S e ,r e +iEt        0  =    − m  E + σ ⋅p i  S i ,l e +iEt   p     −iEt    E + eφ − σ ⋅(p + eA ) −m  S e ,l e     =0   −iEt    ( ) m E e φ σ p e A − + + ⋅ + S e  i , r    e  h  (3.131) (3.132) 4. METAMORPHOUS TRANSCENDENTAL VIEW 4.1. Metamorphoses & the Essence of Spin The preceding sections make it clear that the particle e0 of Consciousness can take many different forms as different primordial entities and, further, can have different manifestations as different wave functions and/or fields in different contexts even as a single primordial entity. For example, the wave functions of an electron can take the Dirac, Weyl, quaternion or determinant form respectively in different contexts depending on the questions one asks and the answer one seeks. However, the answer one gets is determined by the free will of Consciousness commonly termed as the measurement problem and is understood currently as the randomness of Nature. For another example, depending on the context, the manifestations of an entity such as an electron can take the form of a bi-spinor (ψe, ψi)T in spinized self-interaction and bi-vector (E, iB)T or electromagnetic potential Au=(ϕ, A) in electromagnetic interactions. Further, these forms are self-contained through their respective self-referential Matrix Law. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 82 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness Now, if we ask the question how Consciousness creates a free fermion, we have shown several versions of it. If we ask the question how an entity participates in weak interaction, the answer is: through fermionic spinization and unspinization. If we ask the question how an entity participates in the strong interaction, the answer is: imaginary momentum (downward self-reference). If we ask the question how an entity participates in an electromagnetic interaction, the answer is: through bosonic spinization and unspinization. If we ask the question, how an entity participates in a gravitational interaction, the answer is: through a timeless, spaceless and/or massless external and internal wave function in prespacetime. Further, this work also makes it clear that primordial self-referential spin in prespacetime (Consciousness) is hierarchical and that it is the cause of primordial distinctions for creating the self-referential entities in the dual world. There are several levels of spin: (1) spin in the Head of Consciousness making primordial external and internal phase distinctions of external and internal wave functions; (2) spin of the Body (ether) of Consciousness making primordial external and internal wave functions which accompanies the primordial phase distinctions; (3) self-referential mixing of these wave functions through Matrix Law before spatial spinization (energy/time spin); (4) unconfining spatial spin through spatial spinization (electromagnetic and weak interaction) for creating bosonic and fermionic entities; and (5) confining spatial spin (strong interactions) creating the appearance of quarks through imaginary momentum (downward self-reference). 4.2. The Determinant View & the Meaning of Klein-Gordon Equation In the determinant view, the Matrix Law collapses into Klein-Gordon form as shown in § 3 but so far we have not defined the form of the wave function as a result of the said collapse. Here, we propose that the external and internal wave functions (objects) form a special product state ψ eψ i∗ with ψ i∗ containing the hidden variables, quantum potentials or self-gravity as shown below, visa versa. From the following equations for unspinized free particle in Dirac and Weyl form respectively:  E − m − p ψ e , +      − p E + m ψ  = L M ψ D = 0 i , −    (4.1) − m ψ e, l    = LMψW = 0 E + p ψ i , r  (4.2) and  E− p   −m  we respectively obtained the following equations in the determinant view (Klein Gordon form): ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 83 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  ( DetLM )ψ e, +ψ i∗, − = (E 2 − m 2 − p 2 )ψ e, +ψ i∗, − = 0    (E 2 − m 2 − p 2 )ψ e, + = 0    2 2 2 ∗  (E − m − p )ψ i,− = 0   and (4.3)  (DetLM )ψ e,lψ i∗,r = (E 2 − p 2 − m 2 )ψ e,lψ i∗,r = 0    (E 2 − p 2 − m 2 )ψ e,l = 0   2 2 2 ∗   (E − p − m )ψ i,r = 0   (4.4) By way of an example, equation (4.1) has the following plane-wave solution: ψ e , + = ae, + e −i ( Et −p⋅x )    ψ = a e −i ( Et −p⋅x )  i,−  e, −  from which we have: ψ e, +ψ i∗, − = (ae, + e− i ( Et −p⋅x ) )e (ai∗, −e + i ( Et −p⋅x ) )i (4.5) (4.6) where  (Et − p ⋅ x )e = φe    (4.7)  − (Et − p ⋅ x )i = φi  are respectively the external and internal phase in the determinant view. The variables in ψ i∗, − play the roles of hidden variables to ψ e, + which would be annihilated, if ψ i∗, − were allowed to merged withψ e, + . Indeed, if relativistic mass in the external wave function ψ e, + is considered to be inertial mass, then the relativistic mass in the conjugate internal wave function ψ ∗ i,− plays the role of gravitational mass. We will discuss quantum potential later. Similarly, from the following equations for spinized free fermion in Dirac and Weyl form respectively:  E − m −σ⋅p ψ e, +   = LMψ = 0    ψ − σ ⋅ p E + m   i , −  (4.8) − m ψ e, l   E −σ⋅p  = LMψ = 0   E +σ⋅p ψ i , r   −m (4.9) and ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 84 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness where ψD=(ψe,+, ψi,-)T=(ψ1,ψ2, ψ3, ψ4)T and ψW=(ψe,l, ψi,r)T=(ϕ1, ϕ2, ϕ3, ϕ4)T, we respectively obtained following equations in the determinant view (Klein Gordon form):  ( Detσ LM )ψ e , +ψ i∗, − = (E 2 − m 2 − p 2 )I 2ψ e, +ψ i∗, − = 0  (4.10)   2 2 2 (E − m − p )ψ 1 = 0   2 2 2   (E − m − p )ψ 2 = 0   (E 2 − m 2 − p 2 )ψ 3∗ = 0     2 2 2 ∗ (E − m − p )ψ 4 = 0   and  (Detσ LM )ψ e,lψ i∗,r = (E 2 − p 2 − m 2 )I 2ψ e,lψ i∗,r = 0  (4.11)   2 2 2 (E − p − m )φ1 = 0    2 2 2  (E − p − m )φ2 = 0   (E 2 − p 2 − m 2 )φ3∗ = 0     ∗ 2 2 2 (E − p − m )φ4 = 0   In the presence of electromagnetic potential A µ = (φ , A ) , we have from equations (4.1) and (4.2) the following equations:  E − eφ − m − p-eA ψ e , +     = LMψ D = 0  − p-eA E − eφ + m ψ i , −   (4.12) and  E − eφ − p-eA −m ψ e , l  (4.13)    = LMψW = 0  −m E − eφ + p-eA ψ i , r   from which we respectively obtained the following equations in the determinant view (Klein Gordon form):  (DetLM )ψ e, +ψ i∗, − = (E − eφ )2 − m 2 − (p-eA )2 ψ e, +ψ i∗, − = 0  (4.14)   2 2 2 (E − eφ ) − m − (p-eA ) ψ e, + = 0   2   2 2 ∗ (E − eφ ) − m − (p-eA ) ψ i , − = 0   ( ( ( and ( ) ) ) )  (DetLM )ψ e ,lψ i∗,r = (E − eφ )2 − (p-eA )2 − m 2 + αβ − βα ψ e ,lψ i∗,r = 0    (E − eφ )2 − (p-eA )2 − m 2 + αβ − βα ψ e,l = 0    2  2 2 ∗ (E − eφ ) − (p-eA ) − m + αβ − βα ψ i ,r = 0   ( ( ) ) (4.15) where α = E − eφ and β = p-eA . After spinization of equations (4.12) and (4.13), we have:  E − eφ − m −σ⋅(p-eA ) ψ e , +   = LM ψ D = 0     −σ⋅(p-eA ) E − eφ + m ψ i , −  (4.16) and ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 85 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness −m  E − eφ −σ⋅(p-eA ) ψ e , l  (4.17)  = LMψW = 0    −m E − eφ + σ⋅(p-eA ) ψ i , r   from which we respectively obtained the following equations in the determinant view (Klein Gordon form):  (Detσ LM )ψ e , +ψ i∗, − = (E − eφ )2 − m 2 − (p-eA )2 + eσ ⋅ B I 2ψ e , +ψ i∗, − = 0  (4.18)   2 2 2 (E − eφ ) − m − (p-eA ) + eσ ⋅ B I 2ψ e, + = 0   2   2 2 ∗ (E − eφ ) − m − (p-eA ) + eσ ⋅ B I 2ψ i , − = 0   ( ( ( and ) ) ) ( )  ( Detσ LM )ψ e,lψ i∗,r = ( E − eφ )2 − (p-eA )2 − m 2 + eσ ⋅ B-ieσ ⋅ E I 2ψ e,lψ i∗,r = 0  (4.19)   (E − eφ )2 − (p-eA )2 − m 2 + eσ ⋅ B-ieσ ⋅ E I 2ψ e,l = 0    2  2 2 ∗ (E − eφ ) − (p-eA ) − m + eσ ⋅ B-ieσ ⋅ E I 2ψ i ,r = 0   ( ( ) ) In equations (4.16) and (4.17), the couplings of E and/or B with spin σ are either implicit or hidden. These interactions are due to self-referential Matrix Law LM which causes mixing of the external and internal wave functions. However, in the determinant view, these interactions are made explicit as shown in equations (4.18) and (4.19) respectively. 4.3. The Meaning of Schrodinger Equation & Quantum Potential It can be shown that the following Schrodinger Equation is the non-relativistic approximation of equation (4.3) or (4.4): i∂ tψ = Hψ = − 1 2 ∇ψ 2m (4.20) where ψ = ψ Re + iψ Im . Equation (4.20) can be written as two coupled equations:  ∂ tψ Re = Hψ Im    ∂ ψ = − H ψ  t Im Re  or ∂t  H − H ψ Re   =0 ∂ t ψ Im  (4.21) The above equation describes the non-relativistic self-reference of the wave components ψ Re andψ Im due to spin i. If we designateψ Re as external object, ψ Im is the internal object. It is the non-relativistic approximation of the determinant view of an unspinized particle (Klein-Gordon form) with self-referential interaction reduced to spin i and contained in the wave function from which the quantum potential Q can be extracted. For example, in the case: ψ e, +ψ i∗, − = ae, + e− i ( Et −p ⋅ x )ai , −e + i ( Et − p ⋅x ) ≈ ψ = ρe− iS e+ iζ (4.22) where ae,+ and ai,- are real, ζ contains the hidden variables and: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 86 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  ρ = a e , + ai , −  (4.23)    S = (E p t − p ⋅ x )e   ζ = (E t − p ⋅ x )  p i   p2   Ep =     2m we can derive the following quantum potential (details will be given elsewhere): (4.24)  p2  1 2 Q=− (∇ζ ) =  −  = (− E p )i 2m  2m  i which originates from spin i in: ψ i∗, − = ai , − ei ( Et − p ⋅x ) ≈ ai , −e + imt e + iζ (4.25) Q would negate the non-relativistic kinetic energy of the external wave function if the external wave function and the conjugate internal wave function would merge. Further, it can be shown that the Pauli Equation is the non-relativistic approximation of equation (4.18) which is the determinant view of a fermion in an electromagnetic field in Dirac form: ϕ ϕ   1 (− i∇ − eA )2 − e σ ⋅ B + eφ  1  i∂ t  1  =  2m  ϕ 2   ϕ 2   2m (4.24) It contain non-relativistic self-reference due to both spin i and σ and will be treated elsewhere in detail when and if time permits. 4.4 The Third State of Matter Traditionally, a scalar (spinless) particle is presumed to be described by the Klein-Gordon equation and is classified as a boson. However, in this work we have suggested that Kein-Gordon equation is a determinant view of a fermion, boson or an unspinized entity (spinlesson) in which the external and internal wave functions (objects) form a special product state ψ eψ i∗ with ψ ∗ as the origin of hidden variable, quantum potentials or i self-gravity. The unspinized entity (spinlesson) is neither a boson nor a fermion but may be classified as a third state of matter described by the unspinized equation in Dirac or Weyl (chiral) form, for example: −ip µ xµ    E − m − p  ae, + e     = LM ,e µ  − p E +m −ip xµ    a e  i,−  ( ISSN: ψ  LM ,i ) e, +  = L M ψ = 0 ψ i , −  Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (4.25) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 87 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness −ip µ xµ   (4.26) − m  ae ,l e ψ e ,l    = LM ψ = 0  = LM ,e LM ,i   µ  −ip xµ E + p   ψ i ,r   ai , r e  The hadronized versions of the above equations in which the momentum is imaginary are respectively as follows: ψ   E − m − p i  se, + e − iEt  (4.27)  = LM , e LM , i  e , +  = L M ψ = 0   − iEt      − p i E + m  s i , − e ψ i , −   E−p   −m ( (  E − pi   −m  ) ) − m  se, l e − iEt   = LM , e  E + p i  si , r e − iEt  ( ψ e, l   = LM ψ = 0 LM , i   ψ i , r  ) (4.28) The third state of matter may not be subject to the statistical behavior of either bosons or fermions. The wave functions of a fermion and boson are respectively a bispinor and bi-vector but that of the third state (spinlesson) is two-component complex scalar field. The third state of matter is the precursor of both fermionic and bosonic matters/fields before fermionic or bosonic spinization. Thus, we suggest that it steps into the shoes played by the Higgs field in the standard model which so far has not been found. Further, in this scenario, mass is created by the self-referential spin (imagination) of Consciousness. 5. WEAK INTERACTION Weak interaction is an expressive process (emission or radiation) through fermionic spinization with or without intermediary bosonic spinization and the associated reverse process (capture or absorption). There are two possible kinds of mechanisms at play. One kind is the direct fermionic spinization of an unspinized massive particle as shown in § 3: p = p 2 = − Det (σ⋅p ) → σ ⋅ p (5.1) that is, for example:  E − m − p ψ e   E − m −σ ⋅p ψ e     = 0 →    = 0  −σ .p E + m ψ i   − p E + m ψ i  and the following reverse process: (5.2) σ ⋅ p → − Det(σ⋅p) = p 2 = p (5.3)  E − m − p ψ e   E − m −σ ⋅p ψ e    = 0    = 0 →  − p E + m  −σ .p E + m ψ i    ψ i  (5.4) that is, for example: Processes (5.1) and (5.3) only conserve spin in the dual world as a whole. If they hold in reality, neutrino may not be needed in the weak interaction as currently understood or assumed. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 88 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness Accordingly, beta decay of a neutron may involve the spinizing process (5.1) during which an unspinized proton (or electron) gains its spin 1/2 and a bound spinized electron becomes free as follows: (1) Spinless Proton → Spinized Proton → Release of Bound Electron; or (2) Spinless Electron → Spinized Electron → Release of Spinized Electron. Process (1) seems in closer agreement with experimental data on g-factor and charge density of neutron. There is no exchange particle involved in process (1) or (2). In neutron synthesis from proton and electron, if it exists, the reverse process (5.3) occurs during which a spinized proton (or electron) loses its spin and free electron becomes tightly bound to proton. We suggest that the following equation governs free unspinized particles having mass m and electric charge e respectively but spinless, that is, they are pion-like particles or pion particles π ± themselves (their combination generates π 0 ): or  E − m − p ψ e   ( E − m)ψ e = pψ i     = 0    − p E + m ψ i  ( ) E + m ψ = p ψ i e      After spinization through (5.1), we arrive at Dirac equation:  E − m −σ ⋅p ψ e  or  ( E − m )ψ e = σ ⋅ pψ i     = 0    −σ ⋅p E + m ψ i   ( E + m )ψ i = σ ⋅ pψ e     Assuming a plane wave ψ e,+ = e − ip µ x µ (5.5) (5.6) exists for equation (5.5), we obtain the following solution for said equation ( π − -like plane-wave solution): ψ e , +    ψ  =  i,−   − ip µ x µ   1  −ip µ x   e E +m µ    p − ip µ x µ  = N  p e 2E  e   E +m   E +m  (5.7) where N is a normalization factor and where we have utilized the following relation for an energy eigenstate: ( E + m )ψ i ,− = pψ e,+ → ψ i ,− = p ψ e,+ E+m (5.8) After spinization of solution (5.7): ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 89 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 1 0       0 1   1 0    1   p x − ip y   p  → 0 1  =  pz        E + m   σ ⋅p   E + m E + m    p + ip y − p z   E + m  x  E+m E + m (5.9) we arrive at the free plane-wave electron solution for Dirac equation (5.6): ψ e↑, +   = ψ   i,−   1     0  µ and ψ e↓, +  E + m  p z  −ip xµ  = e     2E E +m ψ i , −   p x + ip y     E +m   0     1  µ (5.10) E + m  p x − ip y  −ip xµ e 2E  E + m   −p  z    E +m  In the above solutions for external spin up and down respectively, the external spin 1/2 is balanced by the internal spin components which may be deemed as antineutrino such that the total spin in the dual world is still conserved to zero. Therefore, it seems that external spin up or down can be created without the need of a separate antineutrino in beta decay, if any excessive energy ∆E and or momentum ∆p are allowed to cancel each other in the Head of Consciousness:  e − i (∆Et − ∆p ⋅x )   − i (∆Et − ∆p⋅x )  → e − i (∆Et − ∆p⋅ x )e + i (∆Et − ∆p ⋅x )t = e − i (∆Et − ∆p ⋅x )+ i (∆Et − ∆p⋅x ) = e0 = 1 e    (5.11) Further, if Consciousness allows the following bosonic spinization of massive spinless particle (e.g., as unstable particle with very short life-time): p = p 2 = −( Det (s⋅p + I 3 ) − Det ( I 3 )) ↔ s ⋅ p that is, for example:  E −m   −p  and/or − p ψ e   E − m −s⋅p ψ e    = 0 ↔    = 0  −s⋅p E + m ψ i  E + m ψ i      p = p 2 = − ( Det (s ⋅p + I 3 ) − Det ( I 3 )) → s ⋅ p → (σ ⋅ p )1 + (σ ⋅ p ) 2 (5.12) (5.13) (5.14) that is, for example:  E − m − p ψ e   E − m −s⋅p ψ e     = 0 →    = 0 − p E + m ψ − s ⋅ p E + m   ψ i    i   ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (5.15) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 90 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness − σ ⋅ p ψ e    E − m − σ ⋅ p ψ e    E    = 0      = 0  E ψ i    − σ ⋅ p E + m ψ i  1   − σ ⋅ p 2 →   during which transitory states known as vector bosons W-, W+ and/or Z0 appear and disappear, we have from expression (5.14) the second kind of weak interactions. We point out here that only process (5.14) mediates weak interactions since in process (5.12) vector bosons W-, W+ and/or Z0 are just transitory states that do not decay into fermions. The spinized equation in expression (5.13) for a free massive spin 1 particle may take the following Dirac form: ψ  E  E − m −s⋅p ψ e , +   = L M  e , +  = L M   = L M ψ = 0    ψ   iB   −s⋅p E + m ψ i , _   i, _  (5.16) ψ  iB  E − m −s⋅p ψ e , −   = L M  e, _  = L M   = L M ψ = 0    ψ  E  −s⋅p E + m ψ i , +   i,+  (5.17) or After calculating the determinant:  E −m −s⋅p   = ( E −m)( E + m) − ( −s⋅p )( −s⋅p) Dets  − s ⋅ p E + m   (5.18) We obtain the following: E −m Dets   − s ⋅p  2  p x  − s ⋅p   2  =  E − p 2 − m 2  I −  p p  3  y x E + m     pz px  p p x y p2 y p p z y p p  x z (5.19) p p  y z  p2  z  =  E 2 − p 2 − m 2  I − M T   3 As mentioned in § 3, the last term MT in expression (5.19) makes fundamental relationship E 2 − p 2 − m 2 = 0 not to hold in the determinant view (5.18) unless the action of MT on the external and internal components of the wave function produces null result, that is:  Ex    M T  E y  = ( p x + p y + p z )P ⋅ E = 0 E   z ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (5.20) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 91 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness and  Bx    M T  B y  = ( p x + p y + p z )P ⋅ B = 0 B   z (5.21) Thus, if Consciousness allows these violations to exist transitorily, equations (5.16) and (5.17) may describe free vector bosons W- and W+ respectively; their combination then describes free vector boson Z0 and MT may be deemed as transitory mass (or mass operator). In contrast to processes (1) and (2), vector bosons W- and W+ or the like mediate the spinization of spinless proton or electron respectively as follows: (3) Spinless Proton → Spinized Vector Boson W+ → Spinized Proton + Spinized 2nd Fermion → Release of Bound Electron + Spinized 2nd Fermion; and (4) Spinless Electron → Spinized Vector Boson W- → Spinized Electron + Spinized 2nd Fermion → Release of Spinized Electron + Spinized 2nd Fermion. It is hoped that the metamorphous forms of Matrix Law in § 3, their further metamorphoses and the corresponding wave functions that these laws govern will be able to accommodate all known particles in the particle zoo. Very importantly, there may be no parity violations in weak interactions such as beta decay as the apparent parity violation in the experiment may simply be explained as a spin polarization effect in which the spin polarization influences the dynamics and directions of the emitted electron in an external magnetic field. Also, there may be no need for Higgs boson to generate mass since mass is generated by self-referential spin within the Head of Consciousness, so the particle of Consciousness is simply 1= e0=eiM-iM …. 6. ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERACTION Electromagnetic interaction is an expressive process (radiation or emission) through bosonic spinization of a massless and spinless entity and the associated reverse process (absorption). There are possibly two kinds of mechanisms at play. One kind is the direct bosonic spinization (spinizing radiation): p = p 2 = − ( Det (s⋅p + I 3 ) − Det ( I 3 )) → s ⋅ p (6.1) that is, for example:  E  −p ISSN: − p ψ e  − s⋅p ψ e   E   = 0 →    = 0 E  ψ i  E ψ i   −s.p Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (6.2) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 92 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness and the following reverse process (unspinizing absorption): s ⋅ p → −(Det (s⋅p + I 3 ) − Det ( I 3 )) = p 2 = p (6.3) that is, for example:  E − s⋅p ψ e   E    = 0 →  E  ψ i   − s.p −p − p ψ e    = 0 E ψ i  (6.4) The radiation or absorption of a photon during acceleration of a charged particle may be direct bosonic spinizing or unspinizing process respectively: (1) Bound Spinless & Massless Particle → Bound Spinized Photon → Free Spinized Photon; and (2) Free Spinized Photon → Bound Spinized Photon → Bound Spinless & Massless Particle. These two processes may also occur in nuclear decay and perhaps in other processes. Assuming a plane wave ψ  E  −p e,+ =e − ip µ x µ − p ψ e    = 0 E ψ i  exists for the spinless and massless particle: or  Eψ e = pψ i     Eψ i = pψ e  (6.5) we obtain the following solution for this equation:  −ip µ xµ   1  − ip µ x  ψ e,+  1 e  p e µ =  = N µ  p −ip xµ    ψ i , −  2 e E      E   (6.6) where we have utilized the following relation for an energy eigenstate and N is the normalization factor : Eψ i , − = p ψ e, + → ψ i , − = p ψ e,+ E (6.7) After spinization:   0  p s ⋅ p  ip z → = E E  E  ip y −  E − ip z E 0 ip x E ip y   E  ip − x E   0   (6.8) We arrive at the plane-wave solution: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 93 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  1     0   0  ψ ex,+    − ip µ x µ 1 0  =  e ψ i , −  2  ip z     E   −ip y   E     0     1   0  ψ ey,+    − ip µ x µ 1  = − ip z e ψ i , −  2 E      0   ip x   E     0     0  (6.9)  1   − ip µ x µ ψ ez,+     = 1  ip y e ψ i,−  2 E     −ip x     E   0  for the spinized photon equation: −s⋅p ψ e   E    = 0 E  ψ i   −s⋅p or  Eψ e = s ⋅ pψ i    = ⋅ E ψ s p ψ  i e (6.10) The second kind of electromagnetic interaction is the release (radiation) or binding (absorption) of a spinized photon without unspinization: (3) Bound Spinized Photon → Free Spinized Photon; and (4) Free Spinized Photon → Bound Spinized Photon. Processes (3) and (4) occur at the openings of an optical cavity or waveguide and may also occur in atomic photon excitation and emission and perhaps other processes. For bosonic spinization p = p 2 → s ⋅ p , the Maxwell equations in the vacuum (c=1; ε0=1) are as follows:   E − s ⋅ p  E      = 0  E  i B   − s ⋅p    p⋅E = 0   p⋅B = 0         ∂ t − ∇ ×  E    ∂tE = ∇ × B      = 0    ∂ t  B  ∇ ×   ∂ t B = −∇ × E   or  ,  ∇ ⋅E = 0 ∇⋅E = 0      ∇ ⋅B = 0    ∇⋅B = 0        (6.11) If we calculate the determinant:  E −s⋅p   = E ⋅ E − ( −s⋅p )( −s⋅p) Dets  − s ⋅ p E   (6.12) We obtain the following: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 94 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  E  − s ⋅p Dets   2  p x  − s ⋅p   2  =  E − p 2  I −  p p  3  y x E     pz px  p p x y p2 y p p z y p p  x z (6.13) p p  =  E 2 − p 2  I − M T y z   3  p2  z  The last term MT in expression (6.13) makes fundamental relationship E 2 − p 2 = 0 not hold in the determinant view (6.12) unless the action of MT on the external and internal components of the wave function produces null result, since equations (5.20) and (5.21) only hold in the source-free region. At the location of a massive charged particle such as an electron or proton, equations (5.20) and (5.21) are also violated by the photon. That is, the photon appears to have mass MT at the source, thus particle pairs may be created on collision of a photon with a massive charged particle. In the Maxwell equations, these violations are counter-balanced by adding source to the equations as discussed below. The Maxwell equations with source are, in turn, coupled to the Dirac Equation of the fermions such as electron or proton forming the Dirac-Maxwell system as further discussed in § 11. Indeed, if source j µ = (ρ , j) ≠ 0 , we have instead:   ∂ t − ∇ ×  E   − j    E − s ⋅ p  E   − ij    ∂ t E = ∇ × B − j       =      =      ∂ t  B   0   E  iB   0   ∇ ×  − s ⋅p  ∂ t B = −∇ × E  (6.14)  or    ,  ∇ ⋅E = ρ p ⋅ E = −iρ ∇⋅E = ρ        ∇⋅B = 0 p⋅B = 0      ∇⋅B = 0            Importantly, we can also choose to use fermionic spinization scheme p = p 2 → σ ⋅ p to describe Maxwell equations. In this case, the Maxwell equation in the vacuum has the form: - σ ⋅ p  σ ⋅ E   E    = 0 σ ⋅ p E i σ ⋅ B    (6.15)  ∂tE = ∇ × B     ∂ t B = −∇ × E   ∇⋅E = 0     ∇ ⋅B = 0    (6.16) which gives: If source j µ = (ρ , j) ≠ 0 , we have: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 95 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness - σ ⋅ p  σ ⋅ E   − iσ ⋅ j   E    =   ⋅ ⋅ − σ p E i σ B i ρ      (6.17)  ∂ t E = ∇ × B − j    ∂ t B = −∇ × E   ∇⋅E = ρ     ∇⋅B = 0    (6.18) which gives: Therefore, in the fermionic spinization scheme, we have in place of the bi-vector wave function a 4x4 tensor comprising of two bi-spinors (instead of the bi-vector itself) generated by projecting the bi-vector comprised of E and iB to spin σ. Further, we point out here that for a linear photon its electric field E is the external wave function (external object) and its magnetic field B is the internal wave function (internal object). These two fields are always self-entangled and their entanglement is their self-gravity. Therefore, the relation between E and B in a propagating electromagnetic wave is not that change in E induces B visa versa but that change in E is always accompanied by change in B visa versa due to their entanglement (self-gravity). That is, the relationship between E and B are gravitational and instantaneous. 7. STRONG INTERACTION While weak and electromagnetic interactions are expressive processes involving fermionic and bosonic spinizations of spinless entities (the third state of matter) and their respective reverse processes, strong interaction does not involve spinization, that is, strong force is a confining process. It may be assumed that spinless entities in general are unstable and decay through fermionic or bosonic spinization. In order to achieve confinement of a nucleon or stability of the nucleus, we suggest that strong interaction involves imaginary momentum in the confinement zone as illustrated below. There are two types of strong interactions at play. One is the self-confinement of a nucleon such as a proton and the other is the interaction among nucleons such a proton and a neutron. In the Standard Model, a proton is a composite entity comprised of three quarks confined by massless gluons and the interaction among the nucleons is mediated by mesons comprised of pairs of a quark and an antiquark which in turn interact through gluons. However, since no free quarks have been observed, there is good reason to consider other options. We have suggested in § 3 that the proton may be considered as an elementary particle that accomplishes spatial self-confinement through downward self-reference (imaginary momentum). ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 96 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness Here, we will first derive the condition for producing spatial self-confinement of the nucleon and the nuclear potential known as the Yukawa potential. The equation for a massive but spinless entity in Dirac Form is as follows: or (7.1)  E − m − p ψ e   ( E − m)ψ e = pψ i     = 0    − p E + m ψ i   (E + m)ψ i = pψ e     Assuming that the wave function has energy eigenstate -E (that is, the external and internal wave functions have energy eigenstate -E and +E respectively in the determinant view), we can write: (E − m )ψ e = p ψ i → (E − m )e +iEt φe (r ) = p e +iEt φi (r ) → (− E − m )φe (r ) = p φi (r ) (7.2) ( E + m )ψ i = pψ e → (E + m )e +iEtφi (r ) = p e +iEtφe (r ) → φi (r ) = p φe (r ) −E+m (7.3) From expressions (7.2) and (7.3), we can derive the following: (E − m − p )φ (r ) = 0 2 2 2 i or (E − m + ∇ )φ (r) = 0 2 2 (7.4) 2 i Equation (7.4) has radial solution as follows: φi ( r ) = 1 −ir E 2 − m 2 e 4πr (7.5) Then, we have from expression (7.3): φ e (r ) = p − p 1 −ir E 2 − m 2 − E 2 − m 2 1 −ir E 2 − m 2 φ i (r ) = e e → −E −m E + m 4πr E + m 4πr (7.6) where we have utilized the following (for reason to be discussed elsewhere): p φi (r ) = − ∇ 2 1 −ir E 2 −m 2 1 −ir E 2 −m2 e → E 2 − m2 e 4πr 4πr (7.7) The complete radial solution of equation (7.1) for energy eigenstate -E in Dirac form is: (7.8)  − E 2 − m 2 1 +iEt −ir E 2 − m2    E−m 1 e 2 2 +iEt −ir E − m E + m 4πr  = N− E + m    4πr e 1 +iEt −ir E 2 − m2  1 e       4πr  ψ e , − (t , r )  = N  ψ (t , r ) =   ψ i , + (t , r )  where N is a normalization factor. When m2>E2, that is, when the momentum in E2-m2=p2 is imaginary, we have from (7.8):  − i m 2 − E 2 1 +iEt −r m2 − E 2   e − iβ  1 +iEt −rα E+m 4πr  = N  e  1 +iEt −r m2 − E 2 1  4πr   e     4πr  ψ e, − (t , r )  = N  ψ (t , r ) =  ( ) t , r ψ   i,+  ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (7.9) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 97 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness where α = m 2 − E 2 and β = (m − E )(E + m )−1 . Now, if we consider the special case of a timeless, spinless but massive entity in which E=0, that is, the rest mass is all comprised of imaginary momentum p i , we have from (7.9):  − i −rm  e   ψ e   − i  1 −rm 4 π r  = N  ψ (r ) =   = N  e  1 e −rm   1  4πr ψ i   4πr  (7.10) Thus, the internal and external wave functions in expression (7.10) have the form of Yukawa potential and its negative imaginary projection, respectively. We propose that the interior (confinement zone) of an unspinized nucleon is described by wave functions similar to expressions (7.9) or (7.10) and confinement is achieved through downward self-reference (imaginary momentum p i ). Therefore, in this scenario, the three colors of the strong force are the three-dimensional imaginary momentum p i . Further, another implication of this scenario is that in the Machian quantum universe the timeless edge or outside of this universe (which is embedded in prespacetime) is connected to or simply is the timeless inside of the nucleons. If we assume that the internal wave function ψi (which is self-coupled to the external wave function ψe through expression (7.1)) also couples with the external wave function χe of another entity (which is also self-coupled to its internal wave function χi) as, for example: − g 2ψ i χ e = − g 2 1 −mr g2 e χ e = − e −mr χ e 4πr r (7.11) where -g2 is a coupling constant, we can write part of the nuclear potential of a nucleon as follows: V =− g 2 −mr e r (7.12) which is in the form of Yukawa Potential. We should point out here that in this work we shall not try to develop a full Hamiltonian for two interacting nucleons. We now discuss the unspinized and spinized forms of proton. The spinized proton is the commonly known form of proton and we suggest that the unspinized proton may reside in the neutron comprised of the unspinized proton and a spinized electron as illustrated in § 3. The equations for a free unspinized and spinized proton in Dirac Form are respectively as follows: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 98 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  E − m − p i ψ e     = 0  − p i E + m ψ i     (7.13) and (7.14)  E − m − σ⋅p i ψ e     = 0     −σ⋅p i E + m ψ i  where pi is imaginary momentum. From the above derivation, we may write the wave function of an unspinized proton with external and internal energy eigenstate -E and +E respectively as follows (by convention, electron has positive external energy +E and internal energy –E):  − p i 1 +iEt −rα  e   ψ e , − (t , r )  − iβ  +iEt 1 −rα E + m 4 π r     = ψ (t , r ) =  = N N e  e  1 +iEt −rα 1  π 4 r    ψ i , + (t , r )  e    4πr  (7.15) In contrast, an unspinized antiproton with external and internal energy eigenstate +E and -E respectively may have the following wave function:  1 −iEt − rα  e   ψ e, + (t , r ) 1 1 −rα π 4 r  = N  e −iEt  = N  ψ (t , r ) =  e 1 −iEt −rα  iβ  4πr  pi  ψ i , − (t , r )  e    E + m 4πr  (7.16) According to this scenario, the nuclear spin of the neutron is solely due to the tightly bound spinized electron. Indeed, experimental data on charge distribution and g-factor of neutron supports this scenario. We further suggest that the nuclear potential causing tight binding of the spinized electron in the neutron may have the form of expression (7.12). Detailed consideration will be given elsewhere. The wave function of spinized proton described by equation (7.14) can be obtained by spinizing the solution in expression (7.15) as follows: p i = p i2 = − Detσ ⋅ p i → σ ⋅ p i = −iσ ⋅ ∇ (7.17)  ∂ 1    ∂ 1  j + 1/ 2  j + 1 / 2   − i +  ± I 2 = −i  +  ± i I = 2    ∂  r r r r ∂ r r         where j is the total angular momentum number. Choosing j=1/2, we obtain from expression (7.15) two sets of solutions as follows:  − (1 / r + iα ) 1 +iEt −rα   − (1 / r + iα )  (7.18) e     π E + m 4 r E + m     1 +iEt −rα ψ e , − (t , r ) 0 0  = N  = N  ψ (t , r ) =  e  1 +iEt −rα     4πr ψ i , + (t , r )  e 1   4πr      ISSN: 0   0 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc.  JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 99 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 0   0    − (− 1 / r + iα ) 1 +iEt − rα   − (− 1 / r + iα )  e   ψ e , − (t , r )   1 +iEt − rα E+m 4πr  = N  E+m ψ (t , r ) =   = N  4πr e 0 0   ψ i , + (t , r )    1 +iEt −rα     e 1     4πr where α = m 2 −E 2 (7.19) . In the case of timeless proton (that is, when E=0), we have from expressions (7.18) and (7.19) the following:   1  1 +iEt −mr   1  + i e −   (7.18) − − i   mr  4πr mr     ψ e, − (t , r ) 0  = N  0 e +iEt 1 e −mr  = N  ψ (t , r ) =  1 +iEt −mr 4πr    1  ψ i , + (t , r )  e   4πr     0   0   0    0   1  1 + iEt − mr   1  − i e   − i ψ e , − (t , r )   1 − mr  = N  mr e + iEt  = N   mr  4πr ψ (t , r ) =  e 0 4πr 0   ψ i , + (t , r )    1 + iEt − mr    1  e     4πr (7.19) In this scenario, spinization of unspinized proton causes loss of tight binding of spinized electron to unspinized proton the possible cause of which will be considered elsewhere. 8. GRAVITY (QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT) Gravity is quantum entanglement (instantaneous interaction) across the dual-world (see, e.g., Hu & Wu, 2006a-d, 2007a). There are two types of gravity at play. One is self-gravity (self-interaction) between the external object (external wave function) and internal object (internal wave function) of an entity (wave function) governed by the metamorphous Matrix Law described in this work and the other is the quantum entanglement (instantaneous interaction) between two entities or one entity and the dual-world as a whole which may be either attractive or repulsive. As further shown below, gravitational field (graviton) is just the wave function itself which expresses the intensity distribution and dynamics of self-quantum-entanglement (nonlocality) of an entity. Indeed, strong interaction actually is strong quantum entanglement (strong gravity). We point out here that some have suspected that strong interaction is strong gravity. We focus here on three particular forms of gravitational fields. One is timeless (zero energy) external and internal wave functions (self-fields) that play the role of timeless graviton, that is, they mediate time-independent interactions through space quantum entanglement. The ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 100 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness second is spaceless external and internal wave functions (self-fields) that play the role of spaceless graviton, that is, they mediate space (distance) independent interactions through proper time (mass) entanglement. The third is massless external and internal wave functions (self-fields) that play the role of massless graviton, that is, they mediate mass (proper-time) independent interactions through massless energy entanglement. The typical wave function (self-fields) contains all three (timeless, spaceless and massless) components. In addition, the typical wave function also contains components related to fermionic or bosonic spinization. As shown below, timeless quantum entanglement between two entities accounts for Newtonian gravity. Spaceless and/or massless quantum entanglement between two entities may account for dark matter (also see Hu & Wu, 2006) and the Casimir effect. Importantly, gravitational components related to spinization may account for dark energy (also see Hu & Wu, 2006). When E=0, we have from fundamental relationship (3.4): − m2 − p2 = 0 or m2 + p2 = 0 (8.1) We can regard expression (8.1) as a relationship governing the Machian quantum universe in which the total energy is zero. Classically, this may be seen as: (1) the rest mass m being comprised of imaginary momentum P=iPi, or (2) momentum P being comprised of imaginary rest mass m=imi. As shown in § 3, the timeless Matrix Law in Dirac and Weyl form is respectively the following:  −m − p     − p + m  = LM ,e   LM ,i ) = L M (8.2)  − p −m    = LM ,e  −m + p  LM ,i ) = L M (8.3) ( ( Thus, the equations of the timeless wave functions (self-fields) are respectively as follows:  − m − p  g D ,e e −iM      − p + m  g e −iM  = LM ,e   D ,i   V D ,e   = L M VD = 0 LM ,i    VD ,i  (8.4)  − p − m  gW ,e e −iM      g e −iM  = LM ,e − + p m   W ,i   VW ,e   = L M VW = 0 LM ,i ) V  W ,i  (8.5) ( ) and ( Equation (8.4) and (8.5) can be respectively rewritten as: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 101 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  mV = − p VD ,i   D ,e   mVD ,i = p VD ,e  p   VD,e = − VD,i  m   p V = V   D,i D ,e    m or (8.6) and p   (8.7)  VW ,e = VW ,i  m   p   VW ,i = − VW ,e    m To see the coupling of external and internal wave functions (self-fields) in a different perspective we can rewrite (8.6) and (8.7) respectively as follows: (8.8)  mmVD ,eVD ,i = (− p VD ,i )( p VD ,e )     ( p VD ,e )(mVD ,e ) = (mVD ,i )(− p VD ,i ) and (8.9)  mmVW ,eVW ,i = ( p VW ,i )(− p VW ,e )   mVW ,e = p VW ,i  or   mV = − p V W ,e   W ,i    (− p VW ,e )(mVW ,e ) = (mVW ,i )(− p VW ,i ) From expression (8.6), we can derive the following: (m + p )V 2 2 D ,e =0 or (m − ∇ )V 2 2 D ,e =0 (8.10) Equation (8.10) has radial solution in the form of Yukawa potential: V D ,e ( r ) = 1 −mr e 4πr (8.11) So in expression (8.4), M=-imr, that is, momentum is comprised of imaginary mass. The external timeless self-field in expression (8.11) has the form of Newton gravitational or Coulomb electric potential at large distance r→∞. We have from expression (8.6): VD ,i = p p 1 − mr 1 −mr V D ,e = e →i e m m 4πr 4πr (8.12) where we have utilized the following (for reasons to be discussed elsewhere): p VD , e = − ∇ 2 1 −mr 1 −mr e → im e 4πr 4πr (8.13) The complete radial solution of equation (8.4) is then:  1 −mr  e    VD , e  1 1 −mr  = N  4πr  = N  VD (r ) =  e 1 V i − mr 4 π r D , i       e  i  4πr  ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (8.14) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 102 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness where N is a normalization factor. Indeed, expression (8.7) can have same radial solution as expression (8.6):  1 −mr  e   VW ,e  1 1 −mr  = N  4πr  = N  VW (r ) =  e  i 1 e −mr   i  4πr  VW ,i   4πr  (8.15) If we assume that the internal self-field VD,i (which is self-coupled to its external self-field VD,e through expression (8.4) or (8.8)) also couples through timeless quantum entanglement with the external wave function ψe of another entity of test mass mt (which is also self-coupled to its internal wave function ψi ) as, for example: iκmVD ,i mtψ e = iκmi 1 −mr m e mtψ e = −G e −mr mtψ e 4πr r (8.16) where iκ is a coupling constant and G=κ/4π is Newton’s Gravitational Constant, we have gravitational potential at large distance r→∞ as: V g = −G m r (8.17) We should point out here that in this work we shall not try to develop a full Hamiltonian for the two entities interacting through timeless quantum entanglement. When |p|=0, we have from fundamental relationship (3.4): E 2 − m2 = 0 (8.18) We can regard expression (8.6) as a relationship governing a spaceless quantum universe. Classically, this may be seen as the rest mass m being comprised of time momentum (energy E). As shown in § 3, the spaceless Matrix Law in Dirac and Weyl form is respectively the following: 0   E −m   = (LM , e E + m   0 LM , i ) = L M (8.19)  E −m    = LM , e  −m E  LM ,i ) = L M (8.20) and ( and the equation of spaceless wave functions (self- fields) are respectively the follows: 0  g D ,e e −imt   E −m  = LM , e   E + m  g D ,i e −imt   0 (  VD ,e   = L M VD = 0 LM ,i    VD ,i  ) (8.21) and ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 103 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  E − m  gW ,e e −imt    = LM ,e −imt   − m E  gW ,i e  ( VW ,e   = L M VW = 0 LM ,i   V W , i   ) (8.22) The external and internal (spaceless) wave functions VD,e and VD,i in equation (8.21) are decoupled from each other, but those in equation (8.22),VW,e and VW,i, are coupled to each other:  EVD,e = mVD,e  but    EVD,i = −mVD,i   EVW ,e = mVW ,i    EV = mV W ,e   W ,i (8.23) It can be easily verified that the solutions to equation (8.21) are in forms of:  1e −imt   VD , e  1  = N  −imt  = N  e −imt VD =  0  VD ,i   0e  (8.24)  0e imt   V D ,e  0  = N  imt  = N  e imt VD =  1  VD ,i   1e  (8.25) or but the solutions to equation (8.22) are in the forms of: 1e −imt  VW ,e   1  = N  −imt  = N  e −imt VW =   1  VW ,i  1e  (8.26) or 1e imt   VW ,e   1  = N  imt  = N  eimt VW =   1  VW ,i  1e  (8.27) As we shall illustrate below, most quantum entanglements one speaks of in quantum mechanics are spaceless quantum entanglements (gravity) between two entities; dark matter may be a manifestation of this non-Newtonian gravity; and the Casimir effect may be due to this type of spaceless quantum entanglement or, at least, may have a contribution from spaceless quantum entanglement. For simplicity, we will consider two masses m1+mp and m2 respectively located at space points 1 and 2. Their respective spaceless wave functions can be written in Weyl form as follows:  g1W + , e e − i (m1 + m p )t   V1W + =  − i (m1 + m p )t  g  1W + , i e  which form product stateV V 1W + 2W − and  g 2W − , e e − im 2 t   V2W − =  − im 2 t  g e  2W − , i  (8.28) . After mp leaves V1W+ as an emitted particle and get absorbed by V2W-, we may have the following two additional spaceless wave functions in Weyl form: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 104 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness  g1W − , e e − im1t   V1W − =  − im1t  g e  1W −, i  which form product stateV V  g 2W + , e e − i (m2 + m p )t   V2W + =  − i (m 2 + m p )t  g e  2W + , i  and 1W − 2W + (8.29) . The final spaceless quantum state may be written as follows: V = 1 (V1W +V2W − + V1W −V2W + ) = 1 ( 1 + 2 − + 1 − 2 + ) 2 2 (8.30) In this joint spaceless wavefunction, m1 and m2 are quantum entangled due to interaction with and through mp. It is suggested that this space (distance)-independent quantum entanglement (non-Newtonian gravity) between two entities is the cause of dark matter. It is further suggested that this space (distance) independent quantum entanglement (sharing of mass/energy) between two entities after interaction is the cause of or, at least, a contribution to Casimir effect. We should point out here that in this work we shall not try to develop a full Hamiltonian for the two entities interacting through spaceless quantum entanglement. When m=0, we have from fundamental relationship (3.4): E 2 − p2 = 0 (8.31) We can regard expression (8.11) as a relationship governing the massless quantum universe in which the total rest mass (proper time) is zero. Classically, this may be seen as energy E being comprised of momentum p. As shown in § 3, the massless Matrix Law in Dirac and Weyl form is respectively the following:  E  −p  −p   = LM ,e E   E− p   0 0   = LM ,e E + p  ( LM ,i ) = L M (8.32) and ( LM ,i ) = L M (8.33) and the equations of massless wave functions (self-fields) are respectively the following:  E  −p  − p  g D ,e e −iM   = LM ,e  E  g D ,i e −iM  (  VD ,e   = L M VD = 0 LM ,i    VD ,i  ) (8.34)  VW ,e   = L M VW = 0 LM ,i )   VW ,i  (8.35) and  E− p   0  0  gW ,e e −iM   = (LM ,e  E + p  gW ,i e −iM  Equations (8.34) and (8.35) have plane-wave solutions. The external and internal ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 105 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness (masssless) wave functions VD,e and VD,i in equation (8.34) are coupled with each other, but those in equations (8.35),VW,e and VW,i, are decoupled from each other:  EV = p VD ,i   D ,e  EV p V = D ,e   D ,i (8.36)  EVW ,e = p VW ,e     EVW ,i = − p VW ,i  For eigenstate of E and |p|, the solutions to equation (8.34) are in the forms of: but  1e −i (ωt −k⋅x )   V D ,e  1  = N  p −i (ωt −k⋅x )  = N  e −i (ωt −k⋅x ) VD =   e  1  VD ,i  E  (8.37) or  p i (ωt −k⋅x )  VD ,e  1 i (ωt −k⋅x )    = N  E e VD =  = N  e  1ei (ωt −k⋅x )  1  VD ,i    (8.38) but the solutions to equation (8.35) are in the forms of:  1e −i (ωt −k⋅x )  VW ,e   1  −i (ωt −k⋅x )     VW =  = N = N  e   0e −i (ωt −k⋅x )  0  Vw,i    (8.39) or  0ei (ωt −k⋅x )  VW ,e   0  = N  i (ωt −k⋅x )  = N  ei (ωt −k⋅x ) VW =  1  VW ,i   1e  (8.40) Equations (8.34) and (8.35) describe the self-interaction of external and internal massless and spinless wave functions (self-fields). We can build a quantum-entangled state of two massless and spinless entities similar to that of two spaceless entities. It is suggested that this rest mass-independent quantum entanglement (non-Newtonian gravity) between two massless entities may also contribute to the cause of dark matter (also see, Hu & Wu, 2006). 9. CONSCIOUSNESS Our experimental results on quantum entanglement of the brain with external substances suggest that Consciousness is not located in the brain but associated with prespacetime (Hu & Wu, 2006a-c). Thus, these results support the proposition that the transcendental aspect of Consciousness is the basis of reality. Indeed, our view is that reality is an interactive quantum reality centered on Consciousness (prespacetime) and the interaction between Consciousness and reality is the most fundamental self-reference (Hu, 2008b & 2009). The perplexing questions we have tried to answer are: (1) Is quantum reality produced and influenced by Consciousness; or (2) is Consciousness produced and influenced by quantum reality? As shown in the preceding sections, our answers are that Consciousness is both ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 106 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness transcendent and immanent, that is, the transcendental aspect of Consciousness produces and influences reality through self-referential spin as the interactive output of Consciousness and, in turn, reality produces and influences immanent aspect of Consciousness as the interactive input to Consciousness also through self-referential spin (Id.). We have also been asking the question: Where and what is human consciousness in the big scheme of things? Our answer is that human consciousness is a limited or individualized version of the above dual-aspect Consciousness such that we have limited free will and limited observation/experience which is mostly classical at macroscopic levels but quantum at microscopic levels (Id.). For example, as a limited transcendental consciousness, we have through free will the choice of what measurement to do in a quantum experiment but not the ability to control the result of measurement (at least not until we can harness the abilities of our consciousness). That is, the result appears to us as random. On the other hand, at the macroscopic level, we also have the choice through free will of what to do but the outcome, depending on context, is sometimes certain and at other times uncertain. Further, as a limited immanent consciousness, we can only observe the measurement result in a quantum experiment that we conduct and experience the macroscopic environment surrounding us as the classical world (Id.). With these “big” questions out of the way, we now focus on some of the details of how human experience (as limited immanent consciousness) is produced through the brain and how human free-will (as limited transcendental Consciousness) may operate through the brain. These questions have also been considered by us previously. Figure 9.1 Interaction between an object and the brain (body) in the dual-world ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 107 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness As illustrated in Figure 9.1, there are two kinds of interactions between an object (entity) outside the brain (body) and the brain (body). The first and commonly known kind is the direct physical and/or chemical interactions such as sensory input through the eyes. The second and lesser-known but experimentally proven to be true kind is the instantaneous interactions through quantum entanglement. The entire world outside our brain (body) is associated with our brain (body) through quantum entanglement thus influencing and/or generating not only our feelings, emotions and dreams but also the physical, chemical and physiological states of our brain and body. Importantly, quantum entanglement may participate in sensory experience such as vision, for example, as follows (keep in mind that an interaction with the external world is accompanied by its counterpart interaction with the internal world): (1) A light ray reflected and/or emitted from an object outside the brain enters the eye, gets absorbed, converted and amplified in the retina as propagating action potentials which travel to the central nervous system (CNS); (2) In the CNS, the action potentials drive and influence the mind pixels which according our theory is the nuclei such as protons with net nuclear spins and/or electrons with unpaired spins; and (3) Either the driven or influenced dynamic patterns of the mind-pixels in the internal world form the experience of the object, or more likely our visual experience of the object is the direct experience of the object in the external world through quantum entanglement established by the physical interactions. In the latter case, there is no image of the outside world in the brain. Further, in the case in which the object outside the brain is an image such as a photograph, there also exists the possibility that our visual experience is not only the experience of the photograph as such through quantum entanglement but also the experience of the object within the photograph through additional quantum entanglement. We hope that through careful experiments, we can find out which mechanism is actually true or whether both are true in reality. The action potentials in the retina, the neural pathways and the CNS are driven by voltage-gated ion channels on neural membranes as embodied by the Hodgkin-Huxley model: ∂ tVm = − 1    ∑ (Vm − Ei )gi  Cm  i  (9.1) where Vm is the electric potential across the neural membranes, Cm is the capacitance of the membranes, gi is the ith voltage-gated or constant-leak ion channel (also see, Hu & Wu, 2004c & 2004d). The overall effect of the action potentials and other surrounding factors, especially the magnetic dipoles carried by oxygen molecules due to their two unpaired electrons, is that inside the neural membranes and proteins, there exist varying strong electric field E and fluctuating magnetic field B that are also governed by the Maxwell equation: ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 108 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness - σ ⋅ p  σ ⋅ E   E    = 0 or E  iσ ⋅ B  - σ ⋅p  ∂tE = ∇ × B     ∂ t B = −∇ × E   ∇⋅E = 0     ∇⋅B = 0    (9.3) where we have set the classical (macroscopic) electric density and current j µ = (ρ , j) = 0 inside the neural membranes. Further, for simplicity, we have not considered the medium effect of the membranes, that is, we have treated the membranes as a vacuum. Microscopically, electromagnetic fields E and B or their electromagnetic potential representation A µ = (φ , A ):  E = −∇φ − ∂ t A     B = ∇× A  (9.4) interact with proton of charge e and unpaired electron of charge –e respectively as the following Dirac-Maxwell systems:   E −eφ − m −σ⋅(p −eA ) ψ e, −    = LM ψ = 0        −σ⋅(p −eA ) E −eφ + m ψ i , +  p - σ ⋅ p  σ ⋅ E   − iσ ⋅ (ψ † β αψ )   E     =  † σ ⋅ p E i σ ⋅ B − i ( ψ ββψ )     p (9.5) (9.6) and   E + eφ − m − σ ⋅(p + eA ) ψ e, +    =L M ψ = 0       − σ ⋅(p + eA ) E + eφ + m ψ i , −  e - σ ⋅ p  σ ⋅ E   − iσ ⋅ (ψ † β αψ )   E    = E  iσ ⋅ B   − i (ψ † ββψ )  e - σ ⋅p where β and α are Dirac matrices. (9.7) (9.8) In equations (9.5) and (9.7), the interactions (couplings) of E and/or B with proton and/or electron spin operator (σ)p and (σ)e are hidden. But they are due to the self-referential Matrix Law which causes mixing of the external and internal wave functions and can be made explicit in the determinant view as follows. For Dirac form, we have:   E −eφ − m −σ⋅(p −eA ) ψ e, −    = LM ψ = 0        −σ⋅(p −eA ) E −eφ + m ψ i , +  p ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (9.9) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 109 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness   (E − eφ − m )(E − eφ + m) −      ∗ →   I 2ψ e, −ψ i , + = 0    (− σ ⋅ (p − eA ))(− σ ⋅ (p − eA ))    p (( ) ) → (E − eφ ) − m 2 − (p − eA ) + eσ ⋅ B I 2ψ e , −ψ i∗, + = 0 p 2 2 For Weyl (chiral) form, we have: −m   E − eφ −σ⋅(p − eA )  ψ e ,r   = 0     −m E −eφ +σ⋅(p − eA )  ψ i ,l   p (9.10) → (((E − eφ − σ ⋅ (p − eA ))(E − eφ + σ ⋅ (p − eA)) − m2 )I 2ψ e,rψ i∗,l = 0)p (( ) ) → (E − eφ ) − m 2 − (p − eA ) + eσ ⋅ B-ieσ ⋅ E I 2ψ e,rψ i∗,l = 0 p 2 2 These two couplings are also explicitly shown in Dirac-Hestenes formulism or during the process of non-relativistic approximation of the Dirac equation in the present of external electromagnetic potential Aµ. We can carry out the same procedures for an electron to show the explicit couplings of (σ)e with E and B. One effect of the couplings is that the action potentials through E and B (or Aµ) input information into the mind-pixels in the brain (Hu & Wu, 2004c, 2004d & 2008a). Judging from the above Dirac-Maxwell systems, we are inclined to think that said information is likely carried in the temporal and spatial variations of E and B (frequencies and timing of neural electric spikes and their spatial distributions in the CNS). Another possible effect of the couplings is that they allow the transcendental aspect of consciousness through wave functions (the self fields) of the proton and/or electron to back-influence E and B (or Aµ) which in turn back-affect the action potentials through the Hodgkin-Huxley neural circuits in the CNS (also see, Hu & Wu, 2007d & 2008a). We will carry out detailed studies of the above sketched possible mechanisms elsewhere. Here we will speculate a bit about how human free-will as a macroscopic quality of limited transcendental consciousness may originate microscopically under the particular high electric voltage environment inside the neural membranes. For example, one possibility is that the human free will as thought or imagination produces changes in the phase of external and internal wave functions: ei 0 = e−i ( ∆Et −∆p⋅x )+i ( ∆Et −∆p⋅x ) = (e−i ( ∆Et−∆p⋅x ) )e (e+i ( ∆Et−∆p⋅x) )i (9.13) where ( )e and ( )i respectively indicate external and internal wave functions, which in turn back-affect E and B (or Aµ) in the high electric voltage neural membranes through the Dirac Maxwell systems illustrated above. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 110 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 10. APPLICATIONS, PREDICTIONS, QUESTIONS & ANSWERS As we mentioned earlier, the major breakthrough in this work came in part as we struggled to find answers to fundamental questions posed by our own experimental results (Hu & Wu, 2006b, 2006c, 2006d & 2007a). One of such questions was: How was it possible for a person located in one place to feel the effect of an anesthetic applied to quantum-entangled water sample located at another location without having actually inhaled or ingested said anesthetic? The simplest answer is that our consciousness is not located within spacetime but within prespacetime or is simply prespacetime itself as we have theorized ourselves earlier but might be reluctant to accept without experimental proof (Hu & Wu, 2003, 2004b & 2006a; also see Hu, 2009). Another key question was: How was it possible for the temperature of a water sample located at one place to increase or decrease against the temperature of its local environment as the quantum-entangled water sample at a different location is manipulated? One answer is that the energies in the two samples can exchange nonlocally. This is permitted within the principle formulated in this work. Yet, another answer is that the external energy and internal energy of the water sample being measured can be created or annihilated locally under the influence of the remote manipulation through quantum entanglement as illustrated in expression (9.13) and (5.11) respectively. This latter answer is also permitted within the principle formulated in this work. Further, it is possible that both these mechanisms are at play. Only further experiments will tell. Yet a third key question was: How was it possible for the weight of a water sample located at one place to increase or decrease against the gravity of earth at that location as the quantum-entangled water sample at another location is manipulated? One answer is that the weight of the sample being measured can change due to spaceless quantum entanglement with the sample being manipulated as formulated in this work. Further, timeless quantum entanglement as formulated in this work may also play a role in the weight change in the sample being measured. Indeed, many other applications and predictions can be drawn and they will be considered elsewhere if and when time permits. For now we will list some fundamental questions about existence, life and consciousness and give our answers (some are tentative) to them in the context of the principle of existence illustrated in this work. We hope that these questions and answers will also serve as a response to many anticipated questions related to this work. Finally, we will make some predictions and point out some applications also in the form of the questions and answers below. Questions & Answers 1. Was there a Maker of the Universe? Yes. The Maker is Consciousness (Prespacetime) which is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 111 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 2. Was there something before the Universe was born (if there was a birth)? Yes. Consciousness alone (1=e0) without differentiation or dualization. So, it may be said that 1=e0=eiM-iM=eiMe-iM=e-iM/ e-iM = eiM/ eiM…is the particle of Consciousness. 3. How does Consciousness create, sustain and cause evolution of the Universe and all entities in it? Consciousness does these things by hierarchical self-referential spin of ITS mind and body at ITS free will. 4. Why is there materially something instead of nothing? Consciousness is restless and loves to create, sustain and make evolutions of different entities so as to entertain ITSELF. 5. How does Consciousness govern the Universe? Consciousness governs through metamorphous self-referential Matrix Law. 6. What is matter? Matter is a dualized entity (created through hierarchical self-referential spin of the mind and body of Consciousness) comprised of an external wave function (external object) having positive mass/energy by convention and an internal wave function (internal object) having negative mass/energy by convention. 7. What is antimatter? Antimatter is a dualized entity (created through hierarchical self-referential spin of the mind and body of Consciousness) comprised of an external wave function (external object) having negative mass/energy by convention and an internal wave function (internal object) having positive mass/energy by convention. 8. Is energy conserved in the dual-world? Yes, energy is conserved to zero according to the accounting principle of zero. 9. Is energy conserved in the external (internal) world alone? The answer depends on the context. In most natural processes, external (internal) energy is conserved and transformed into different forms without loss due to cancellation between the external and internal worlds. However, in some processes, especially those involving human consciousness and/or intention (free will), energy conservation in the external (internal) world may be slightly violated so that the free will may function. We emphasize here that experimentation is the key to getting scientific answers for these types of quesitons. Also, violation of energy conservation in the external (internal) world may occur in certain cosmic processes (e.g., in the Sun) or in certain weak interactions as will be considered elsewhere. 10. What is quantum entanglement? It is the interaction and/or connections between the external and internal wave functions (objects) of a single dualized entity or among different dualized entities through prespacetime which is outside spacetime. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 112 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 11. What is self-interaction, self-gravity or self-quantum entanglement? Self-interaction is the interaction between the external and internal wave functions (objects) according to the Consciousness equation governed by the self-referential Matrix Law. 12. What is strong force? It is likely downward self-reference through imaginary momentum. It is strong gravity (strong quantum entanglement). 13. What is weak force? It is fermionic spinization and unspinization of spinless entities with or without bosonic intermediary spinization. 14. What is electromagnetic force? It is bosonic spinization and unspinization of massless and spinless entity. 15. What is gravity? It is quantum entanglement across the dual world which includes self-gravity or self-quantum-entanglement between the external and internal wave functions (objects) of a single dualized entity and gravity or quantum entanglement among different entities. 16. What is Newtonian Gravity? It is instantaneous action at large distance caused by timeless quantum entanglement. 17. What is dark matter? Our tentative answer is that it is a nonlocal effect caused by spaceless quantum entanglement. 18. What is dark energy? Our tentative answer is that it is a nonlocal effect caused by quantum entanglement associated with fermionic and/or bosonic spinization. 19. What is a black hole, white hole or white-black hole? It is likely that the black hole in the sense of General Relativity is a mathematical artifact since it seems that general relativity does not take the internal world or the negation of external world into consideration. Therefore, it is likely that black holes only appear to exist. The internal wave function (object) appears to the external wave function (object) as a black hole, visa versa. The external wave function (object) alone appears to be a white hole, so an entity comprised of the external and internal wave functions (objects) appear to be a white-black hole depending on one’s perspective. 20. What is the origin of the Casimir Effect? The Casimir effect is or has contribution from spaceless quantum entanglement due to energy/mass exchange between two entities. 21. What is the origin of the quantum effect? The origin is primordial hierarchical self-referential spin of the mind and body of Consciousness (prespacetime). 22. Does Higgs Boson exist? No, it is likely a mathematical artifact due to the particular gauge-invariant Lagrangian formulation. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 113 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 23. What is information? It is a distinction (either quantitative or qualitative) experienced or perceived by a particular consciousness. 24. What is quantum information? It is a distinction or a state of distinction (either quantitative or qualitative) experienced or perceived by a particular consciousness which is due to a quantum effect such as quantum entanglement. 25. What is the meaning of imaginary unit i? It is the most elementary self-referential process. As imagination in Head of Consciousness, it makes phase distinction of an elementary entity and as an element in the Matrix Law it plays a crucial role in self-referential matrixing creation of Consciousness. 26. What is our view on Godel’s Incompleteness Theorem? It is a reflection of the self-referential nature of mathematics. 27. What is our understanding of the measurement problem or how the classical world appears? The classical world appears as the result of hierarchical collapsing or focusing of the quantum reality through the free will of unlimited and/or limited transcendental aspect of consciousness. By way of an example, a stone, mountain or earth appears to a human consciousness as classical object because the unlimited consciousness has already collapsed/focused it for the human consciousness. Therefore, on the macroscopic level, when we are not looking at the moon, the moon is still there and when we throw a stone at two holes, we will be able to observe both the hole the stone will pass through and the location where it will land. On the other hand, microscopically, when we are not measuring the position of an electron, it may be at the location we want to measure or may be not. That is, our limited free will have the choice of where and when to do the measurement but the answer we get appears to be random since the position the electron to be found is determined by the free will of Consciousness. 28. What is Consciousness? Consciousness is the basis of quantum reality. It is prespacetime which is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. 29. What is human consciousness? It is a limited or individualized Consciousness associated with a particular human brain/body. 30. Does human consciousness reside in human brain? No, the human brain is the interface for human consciousness to experience and interact with the external world. 31. What are spirit, soul and/or mind? They are different aspects or properties of Consciousness which is transcendent, immanent and eternal. 32. What is the essence of The Special Theory of Relativity? The essence of The Special Theory of Relativity is that the speed limit c is applicable in interactions in each of the dual ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 114 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness worlds but not interactions across the dual worlds. Indeed, the reason that no external object can move faster than the speed of light and said object gets heavier and heavier as it approaches the speed of light is due to its increased quantum entanglement with the internal world through its counterpart the internal object. 33. What is our opinion on General Theory of Relativity? If the speed of gravitational interaction based on General Relativity is limited to the speed of light, General Relativity goes against experience/experiments and is thus ontologically invalid. Otherwise, it should be derivable from the properties of quantum entanglement. In any case, it may still be used or treated as an effective or approximate theory. 34. What is our view on the second law of thermodynamics? It is approximately valid but may be violated under some circumstances such as when human intention/consciousness or nonlocal processes such as those mediated by quantum entanglement are involved. 35. What is our opinion on the so-called hard problem of consciousness? This problem arises as a defect of the materialistic philosophy of consciousness which denies that consciousness is the foundation of quantum reality and conscious experience is a feature of the dual-world which is the universe. 36. Where did we come from? Physically/biologically, we came from Consciousness as ITS creation. Spiritually, we are an inseparable part of Consciousness and our consciousness is limited and/or individualized version of Consciousness. 37. Where are we going? Physically/biologically, we disintegrate or die unless we advance our science to the point where death of our biological body becomes a choice, not unavoidability. Also, we are of the opinion that advancement in science will eventually enable us to transfer or preserve our individual consciousness associated with our ailing or diseased bodies to another biological or artificial host. Spiritually, we may go back to Consciousness or reincarnate into a different form of individual consciousness that may be able to recall its past (but we are not yet sure about the latter point). 38. How does the mind influence the brain? Mind influences the brain through free will which acts on subjective entities (internal objects), which in turn affect objective entities (external objects) through the Consciousness Equation. 39. Do we believe in paranormal phenomena? They are likely real and explainable by quantum entanglement. But the effect is likely very small. 40. What is your opinion on homeopathy? It is likely a real effect and explainable by quantum entanglement. But the effect is very small and clinically maybe ineffective. 41. Do we believe in UFOs? Theoretically, they are plausible. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 115 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness 42. What is the origin of the uncertainty principle? The origin is self-referential spin or zitterbewegung. 43. What is the origin of quantum jump or wave collapse? The free will of Consciousness or unlimited transcendental Consciousness in order to observe or experience the universe IT created. Remember that our limited free will is part of the unlimted free will of Consciousness since we are part of Consciousness. 44. Is the total entropy of the universe conserved? Yes, it is conserved to zero in the dual world but is not conserved in each world alone. 45. What is your view of the Mach principle? It is our opinion that the Universe is a Machian quantum universe in which the total energy of the dual world is zero. 46. Is information conserved? It is our opinion that information is conserved to zero in the dual world since each distinction in the external world is accompanied by its negation in the internal world. However, information is not conserved in each world alone. 47. What is a graviton? There is no graviton in the sense of a quantum (particle) which mediated gravitational interaction at the speed of light. However, since gravity is quantum entanglement, the wave function of each entity may be treated as a graviton. 48. Does the repulsive gravitational force exist? Maybe - gravity between the electron and proton is possibly repulsive but it needs experimental verification. 49. Is there an absolute reference frame? Yes, it is simply Consciousness (prespacetime). 11. CONCLUSION As submitters to truth, searching for truth and our origin is the ultimate treasure hunt. Many before us have been on this sacred journey. Some find it spiritually, some got close, some got lost, some gave up, some gave their lives in the process, and some went astray and hostile. Perhaps, scientifically we have gotten closer and/or even been actually there. As proof, we have brought back and reported in our previous papers and this work what we have found and believed to be a few pieces of this great treasure and a practical map for fellow truth seekers to analyze and use. The pieces we found and brought back are both experimental and theoretical. Experimentally, we have demonstrated that: (1) Consciousness is associated with (or simply is) prespacetime and our brain is the vehicle for conscious experiences and operations (feedbacks); and (2) there exists an instantaneous transcendental force (quantum entanglement or gravity) beyond spacetime which makes omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience of Consciousness (prespacetime) possible and feasible. Theoretically, we have presented a detailed model of spin-mediated consciousness previously and, in this work, an ontological and mathematical model (Principle of Existence) centered on Consciousness which through multifaceted and ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 116 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness hierarchical self-referential spin creates, sustains, experience and causes evolution of the Universe. However, since the place of the treasure is so large and the pieces of the treasure so many, we glanced at many but only brought back a few due to our limited capacity and imperfect skills. Or perhaps, some are not brought back so that others may share the joy of finding and bringing them back. After all, what is the fun in bringing back many just by ourselves, even if we have the capacity and skills to do so? Even worse, if the pieces we have brought back were not be genuine or recognized as such, what is the point of bringing back more? It will be far more fulfilling if all truth seekers can both analyze and use the map we have drawn and participate in this most sacred journey and treasure hunt. One of the key features of the principle of existence illustrated in this work is the development and use of hierarchical self-referential mathematics in order to accommodate both the transcendental and immanent qualities/properties of Consciousness (prespacetime). Needless to say, this potential new branch/direction of mathematics is in its infancy and we have not attempted to give a systematic presentation in this work. We hope that mathematicians will see the virtue in our work and, indeed, participate in the development of the new mathematics. To recapitulate, we have in this work laid out an ontological and mathematical foundation towards a science of Consciousness which includes gravity and even spirituality. If we are on the right path, we hope that our efforts mark a new beginning in the pursuit of the Holy Grail of science centered on Consciousness. In the beginning there was Consciousness (prespacetime) eh by itself e0 =1materially empty and spiritually restless. And it began to imagine through primordial self-referential spin 1=e0=eiM-iM=eiMe-iM=e-iM/ e-iM = eiM/ eiM… such that it created the external object to be observed and internal object as observed, separated them into external world and internal world, caused them to interact through self-referential Matrix Law and thus gave birth to the Universe which it has since passionately loved, sustained and made to evolve. In this Universe, the Body (ether), represented by Euler number e, is the ground of existence and can form external and internal wave functions as external and internal objects (each pair forms an elementary entity) and interaction fields between elementary entities which accompany the imaginations of the Head h of Consciousness. The Body can be self-acted on by the self-referential Matrix Law LM of Consciousness. The Head h has imagining power i to project external and internal objects by projecting, e.g., external and internal phase +M =+(Et-p·x)/ħ above the Body e. The Universe so created is a dual-world comprising of the external world to be observed and internal world as observed under each relativistic frame xµ=(t, x). In one perspective of transcendental view, the internal world (which by convention has negative energy) is the negation/image of the external world (which by convention has positive energy). The absolute frame of reference is the Body (ether). Thus, if Consciousness stops imagining (h=i0=0), the Universe would disappear into materially nothingness ei0=e0=1. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 117 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness The accounting principle of the dual-world is conservation of zero. For example, the total energy of an external object and its counterpart, the internal object, is zero. Also in this dual-world, self-gravity is the nonlocal self-interaction (wave mixing) between an external object in the external world and its negation/image in the internal world, that is, the negation appears to its external counterpart as a black hole visa versa. Gravity is the nonlocal interaction (quantum entanglement) between an external object with the internal world as a whole. Some other most basic conclusions are: (1) the two spinors of the Dirac electron or positron are respectively the external and internal objects of the electron or positron; (2) the electric and magnetic fields of a linear photon are respectively the external and internal objects of a photon which are always self-entangled; (3) the proton is likely a spatially confined (hadronized) positron through imaginary momentum (downward self-reference); and (4) a neutron is likely comprised of a unspinized (spinless) proton and a bound and spinized electron. In this dual-world, Consciousness is simply prespacetime having both transcendental and immanent properties/qualities. The transcendental aspect of Consciousness is the origin of primordial self-referential spin (including the self-referential Matrix Law) and it projects the external and internal worlds through spin and, in turn, the immanent aspect of Consciousness observes the external world as the observed internal world through the said spin. Human consciousness is a limited and particular version of this dual-aspect Consciousness such that we have limited free will and limited observation which is mostly classical at macroscopic levels but quantum at microscopic levels. The above ideas (ontology) are forced upon (or rather revealed to) us by our recent theoretical and experimental studies (Hu & Wu, 2006a-d, 2007a). Among other things, we experimentally demonstrated that gravity is the manifestation of quantum entanglement (Id.). We materially live in the external world but experience the external world through its negation, the internal world in the relativistic frame xµ=(t, x) attached to each of our bodies. Interactions within the external world and the internal world are local interactions and conform to special theory of relativity. But interactions across the dual world are nonlocal interactions (quantum entanglement). Strong interaction is likely spatially confining nonlocal self-interaction and nonlocal interaction among spatially confined fermions (hadrons). Therefore, the meaning of the special theory of relativity is that the speed limit c is only applicable in each of the dual world but not interactions between the dual-world. Indeed, the reason that no external object can move faster than the speed of light and the same gets heavier and heavier as its speed approach the speed of light is due to its increased quantum entanglement with the internal world through its counterpart the internal object. Dedication, Tribute & Acknowledgements: We dedicate this work to Consciousness whose light have shone on us and whose truth we strive to reveal at ITS appointed time and place in this living Universe which is ITS Making. IT willing, we further dedicate this work to ITS Spiritual Giants such as Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Buddha, the originator of Hinduism and the originator of Tao. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 118 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness We honor and pay tribute to those who have, directly or indirectly but greatly, contributed towards the advancement and/or reconciliation of Science and Spirituality. They include but not limited to Pythagoras, Laozi, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Archimedes, Zhang Heng, Plotinus, Ibn al-Haytham, Ibn Arabi, Muhammad Rumi, Thomas Aquinas, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Bacon, Galileo Galilei, Giordano Bruno, Johannes Kepler, Isaac Newton, Leonhard Euler, Dante_Alighieri, Leonardo da Vinci, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Rene Decartes,Gottfried Leibniz, Baruch Spinoza,William Blake, James Clark Maxwell, Gustav Fechner, Ernst Mach, Alfred N. Whitehead, Gregor Mendel, Charles Darwin, Helena P. Blavatsky, Annie Besant, Walter Russell, Sri Aurobindo, William James, Max Planck, Albert Einstein, Arthur Eddington, Neil Bohr, Louis de Broglie, Erwin Schrodinger, Werner Heisenberg, Wolfgang Pauli, Paul Dirac, Hermann Weyl, David J. Bohm, John S. Bell, Thomas Edison, Nicola Tesla, Hua Luogeng, Nikolai A. Kozyrev, Carl Jung, Teilhard Chardin, Franklin Merrell-Wolff, John C. Lilly, Buckminster Fuller, Wilhelm Reich, Martin Luther King, Jr., Walt Disney, Alfred_Nobel, John Templeton, Francis Crick, Freeman Dyson, James Watson, David Hestenes, Paul Laffoley, Dick Richardson, Brian Josephson, Rubert Sheldrake and Edgar Mitchell. Some among them have greatly inspired and/or influenced our work. We acknowledge here all of our teachers and schools from elementary to graduate and professional schools for our educations, training and the opportunities bestowed upon us by them. We especially thank the first author’s Ph.D. advisor, Professor Harold M. Swartz, his M.Sc. advisor, Professor Rongliang Zheng, and Physics Professor Yishi Duan who originally directed him to the study of biophysics. We also acknowledge here a special friend of the first author, Fu Kung, who for four years during 1979-1983 assisted him with his needs of physics textbooks. In addition to the individuals mentioned above, we further acknowledge all other scholars, authors and writers whose original work in print publications or on the Internet may bear relevance to our own (See note below). We thank our parents, children and other family members for their everlasting and unconditional love and support. We thank all the editors of journals and online archives who have either seen the virtues in our work or have been tolerant enough to let the same appear in their respective publications and/or online archives. Among them we thank especially the Chief Editor of NeuroQuantology, Dr. Sultan Tarlaci. We thank our past and current friends, colleagues, employees, clients and the institutions, firms and companies for which we worked and/or are still working for, especially Mount Sinai Medical Center & Worldco, LLC. Last but not least, we thank our Motherland, our Adopted Home, Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping which and whom in the large scheme of things have played important roles in shaping our lives and destinies. Note: The first author mentions here the works of the following individuals (by no mean exhaustive) for they either bore relevance or lead him to other scholars’ work. Alain Aspect, Jose B. Almeida, Harold Aspden, John C. Baez, Imants Baruss, Asim O. Barut, Jacques Benveniste, James R. Bogan, Istvan Bokkon, Carl Brannen, Ronald Bryan, Robert N. Boyd, Reginald T. Cahill, David Chalmers, Geoffrey Chew, Elio Conte, Paulo N. Correa, Alexandra N. Correa, Brenda J. Dunne, Richard Feynman, Anthony Freeman, Peter Gariev, D.L. Van Gent, Tepper L Gill, Nicolas Gisin, Tobius Gleim, Danielle Graham, de Haas, Stuart Hameroff, Steven Harnad, Basil J. Hiley, Douglas Hofstadter, Gerard ’t Hooft, Robert G. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 50-119 119 Hu, H &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness Jahn, Gerald Kaiser, Alex Kaivarainen, Louis H. Kauffman, Jaime Keller, Robert M. Kiehn, Y.S. Kim, Alexey A. Kryukov, Alexander G. Kyriakos, Steven Lehar, Leon Maurer, Thomas J. McFarlane, Burinskii Makhlin, Arnold Mindell, Ezra ((Ted) Newman, Guang-jiong Ni, Oleg A. Olkhov, John Paily, Roger Penrose, Michael Persinger, Mitja Perus, N. Vivian Pope, Harold Puthoff, Dmitri Rabounski, Dean Radin, Diego L. Rapoport, Elizabeth A. Rauscher, Steven M. Rosen, Peter Rowlands, Peter Russell, Yuri Rylov, Giovanni Salesi, Ruggero M. Santilli, Mednel Sachs, Jack Sarfatti, Alexander A. Shpilman, B. J. Sidharth, Florentin Smarandache, Frank D. (Tony) Smith, Lee Smolin, Dan Solomon, Jr., Henry Stapp, Victor Stenger, Tuomo Suntola, Doug Sweetser, Sultan Tarlaci, William Tiller, Jacek Turski, Cornelio G. Valdenebro, Max Velmans, John A. Wheeler, Fed A. Wolf, Milo Wolff, Arthur M. Young, J. C. Yoon, Dainis Zeps. However, this note should not be construed as an endorsement of the views and/or results in some of these works nor should it be construed as an indication that all these works contain original and/or valid results. In addition, the first author has also made acquaintances with spiritual individuals among whom are Amar[xx]eth, Ala[x] O[x]iver, Pei[x]i T[x]ng, to mention a few. [SELF-]REFERENCE Hu, H. & Wu, M. Mechanism of anesthetic action: oxygen pathway perturbation hypothesis. Med. Hypotheses 2001a: 57: 619-627. Also see arXiv 2001b; physics/0101083. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin-mediated consciousness theory. arXiv 2002; quant-ph/0208068. Also see Med. Hypotheses 2004a: 63: 633-646. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin as primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2004b; 2:41-49. Also see Cogprints: ID2827 2003. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Action potential modulation of neural spin networks suggests possible role of spin in memory and consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2004c; 2:309-316. Also see Cogprints: ID3458 2004d. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Thinking outside the box: the essence and implications of quantum entanglement. NeuroQuantology 2006a; 4: 5-16. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Photon induced non-local effect of general anesthetics on the brain. NeuroQuantology 2006b 4: 17-31. Also see Progress in Physics 2006c; v3: 20-26. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Evidence of non-local physical, chemical and biological effects supports quantum brain. NeuroQuantology 2006d; 4: 291-306. Also see Progress in Physics 2007a; v2: 17-24. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Thinking outside the box II: the origin, implications and applications of gravity and its role in consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2007b; 5: 190-196. Hu, H. & Wu, M. On dark chemistry: what’s dark matter and how mind influences brain through proactive spin. NeuroQuantology 2007c; 5: 205-213. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Concerning spin as mind-pixel: how mind interacts with the brain through electric spin effects. NeuroQuantology 2008a; 6: 26-31. Hu, H. The state of science, religion and consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2008b; 6: 323-332. Hu, H. Quantum enigma - physics encounters consciousness (book review). Psyche 2009; 15: 1-4. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | Page 764-766 Hari, S. Commentary on Nixon's Guest Editorial in JCER V1(5): Consciousness, Mind and Matter in Indian Philosophy 764 Commentary Commentary on Nixon's Guest Editorial in JCER V1(5): Consciousness, Mind and Matter in Indian Philosophy Syamala Hari* ABSTRACT I am very impressed by the striking similarity of concepts in the Guest Editorial by G. M. Nixon in JCER V1(6) to those of ancient Indian Philosophy on thought, time, and Consciousness. I drew only a few examples from the article to depict the similarity but I am impressed by the elegancy of expression and profoundness of concepts in the whole article. Key Words: self-consciousness, Indian philosophy, time, thought. Let me first of all point out that Indian Philosophy makes a distinction between two types of consciousness and let me call the first type human or animal consciousness and the second type as Consciousness with big C. The former is what our modern studies of consciousness often focus on; it includes ego consciousness also termed self-consciousness. Unlike human consciousness which comes and goes, Consciousness is always and everywhere present and is independent of space, time and causality. According to this philosophy, free will is a capability of Consciousness but it is not a part of human consciousness as we usually think! Free will is the ability to decide consciously and independently of any reason from the past or present, and without expecting anything in the future. Manifestation of free will is not an unconscious nondeterministic random occurrence. The existence or manifestation of free will does not depend upon any memory, and it is not bound by any rules or logic. On the other hand, when we, humans make choices or decisions, they are very often (but not always as we will see later) motivated by purposes, future goals, desires, and so on, all of which already exist in our memory. Consciousness (with big C) is said to be nishkarana in Sanskrit meaning that it is not the effect of any cause. After all, it is free; it would not be free if it depends upon anything else for anything! Thus free will has no origin but is the origin of everything in the universe. A story narrated later in this commentary may help to illustrate how free will is beyond causality. Here are a few examples to see the striking similarity of Nixon’s concepts and those of the ancient philosophy. The abstract of Nixon’s article says: “it” is changeless and formless (presumably a dynamic chaos without location or duration) yet with creative potential. Such a field of near-infinite potential energy could have had no beginning and will have no end, yet within it stirs the desire to experience that brings forth singularities ----- This agrees with what Indian Philosophy says about Consciousness, that it has no beginning and no end, and without location, and has infinite (not near-infinite), immeasurable (aganita in Sanskrit) creative potential. The philosophy also says that desires and thoughts spring out of Consciousness and bring forth the many individual souls (singularities as Nixon says) in Consciousness which has no location but is everywhere and all the time. Nixon’s abstract says: time and experience are so entangled, they need each other to exist.--*Correspondence: Syamala Hari, retired as Distinguished Member of Technical Staff from Lucent Technologies, USA. E-mail: murty_hari@yahoo.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | Page 764-766 Hari, S. Commentary on Nixon's Guest Editorial in JCER V1(5): Consciousness, Mind and Matter in Indian Philosophy 765 Again agrees with Indian Philosophy, according to which time is a thought not material; time and thought are required for human experience. Consciousness is said to be experience independent of time, thought and desire and is transcending the “I” thought (called selfconsciousness in the terminology of this journal). Within the article on page 484, Nixon says: Only rarely can we escape the context of self through which our life experience is filtered, and it must be noted that remembering and (self) consciousness may be the same thing. It may be possible to somewhat escape the selfconstructed prison of time-past through creative inspiration or spontaneous action in a crisis situation, Indeed, Ramana Maharshi (known to some in the west) says that the “I” thought or ego is the source of all other thoughts, experience, and all that is remembered. In his own words: To say 'I am not this' or 'I am that' there must be an 'I'. This 'I' is only the ego or the 'I'-thought. After the rising up of this 'I'-thought, all other thoughts arise. The 'I'-thought is therefore the root thought. If the root is pulled out all others are at the same time uprooted. The following famous story is an example of how creative inspiration or spontaneous action in a crisis situation, which I called free will earlier, overcomes causality and the prison of time-past. Once upon a time, there was a very religious person who spoke nothing but truth all his life. Let us call him Truth Speaker. One day, he was sitting in a grove and doing meditation with closed eyes. Suddenly, he heard the sound of running foot steps. On opening his eyes, he saw a scared man running for his life. The man stopped when he saw Truth Speaker, and said with a gasping breath “I am being chased by robbers. I am running for my life. I cannot run any more. I will hide behind the bushes over here. Please do not reveal my where-abouts to anybody”. So saying, the man ran and hid behind the bushes without even waiting for Truth Speaker to reply. Truth speaker went back to meditation. A few minutes later, he again heard thundering foot steps and opened his eyes. He saw some armed men running. When they saw truth Speaker, they too stopped and said “We are looking for a man whom we saw come this way. Did you see anybody running past you a short while ago? If so, do you know which way he went?” Truth Speaker thought that he should never tell a lie. So, he pointed to the robbers the bush where the scared man was hiding. The robbers then caught the man and killed him. After some days, Truth Speaker died but was taken to hell instead of to heaven. There, Truth Speaker asked the ruler of hell (a personification of justice according to Hindu Religion) - why was he brought to hell instead of to heaven where he should have been on account of speaking nothing but truth all his life. The ruler of hell replied “You spoke truth alright but by telling a lie you could have saved the life of the man being chased by robbers. You did not have a tiny bit of compassion. You were carried away by your arrogance of sticking to your principle and your selfishness to go to heaven. That is why you deserve hell.” The point in the story is not at all whether Truth Speaker went to heaven or hell after death nor whether there is a heaven or hell. The point is a person’s ability to see when to speak truth and when not. Truth Speaker was following a rule which firmly stuck inside his head and his mode of thinking was that of a machine which was programmed to tell truth and therefore never lie. On the other hand, imagine that in the story, Truth Speaker told the robbers that he did not see anybody around earlier that day and they were only the people that he saw until then. In this case, his mind did not execute like a machine, a memorized instruction expected to be carried out. Nor did it care for a future benefit, namely going to heaven. Thus the action of lying was directed neither by the past nor by a future goal. This ability to violate a rule of the past and act on one’s own is a self-starter or spontaneous and is ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | Page 764-766 Hari, S. Commentary on Nixon's Guest Editorial in JCER V1(5): Consciousness, Mind and Matter in Indian Philosophy 766 the true free will. This ability refuses to be told what to do and refuses to be told by somebody or something else; it is above and beyond all causality. References Nixon,G. M. (2010) Time & Experience: Twins of the Eternal Now? Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(5): 482-489. http://mind-and-tachyons.blogspot.com/ http://www.sriramanamaharshi.org/teachings.html http://www.davidgodman.org/rteach/whoami1.shtml ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

218 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 218-219 Sahner, D. Response to the Commentary of Nils J. Nilsson on “Human Consciousness and Selfhood” Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Nils J. Nilsson on “Human Consciousness and Selfhood” David Sahner* ABSTRACT This is my Response to Nils J. Nilsson’s Commentary on my essay “Human Consciousness and Selfhood: Potential Underpinnings and Compatibility with Artificial Complex Systems” which appeared in the December 2010 issue of JCER. Key Words: human consciousness, selfhood, artificial intelligence, complex system. Nils Nilsson has my gratitude for his perceptive comments. In truth, our positions are not as far apart as one might initially think. I completely agree that human consciousness comes in many flavors. For the most part, I would consider these variations to constitute separate "subspecies" of a given type of consciousness. Given (a) the significant differences between the substrates within which AI and human intelligence are, respectively, embedded, and (b) the virtually infinite complexity of the (importantly perishable) human central nervous system and body, I strongly suspect, however, that machine consciousness will be at much more of a remove from human consciousness than, say, my consciousness is from that of a native of Japan. Perhaps it may be best to think of machine consciousness, if and when it should arise, as belonging to a different genus or phylum. Admittedly, this is largely opinion because the riddle of human consciousness has not been deciphered to everyone's satisfaction. Where, precisely, robot consciousness will fit into the taxonomy of consciousness must be empirically defined in the future. The point is made by Nils Nilsson that computers can glean knowledge in ways that have nothing to do with language, and that this does away with a barrier I cite to the instantiation of human intelligence, and attendant consciousness, in an artificial complex system. I would not dispute the statement that machines are capable of various non-linguistic forms of learning, and I am familiar with the fantastic vistas that have been opened by neural nets. What I would emphasize here is that knowledge of specifically human experience cannot be faithfully imparted to a computer because, for the reasons cited in my first paragraph above, it will be of a fundamentally different nature – and language, even the language of the greatest poets, provides only the shadow of a unique human experience. I have no doubt that machines can acquire "knowledge" in many ways, in some cases far more efficiently than humans. In the future, machines may have "machine knowledge" of which they are consciously aware (and which may be terrifically useful) but I don't believe machine consciousness, if it comes to pass, will be precisely like mine. Software may now exist that can reverse engineer a Bachlike piece based on stylistic patterns evident in his work, but I'd claim that this is "discrimination" - not necessarily "sensation." The computer program may be able to abstract a “Bach-like” signature technique from its high-level analysis of a series of notes, but that perception does not necessarily entail sensation as defined by Nicholas Humphrey. Correspondence: David Sahner, M.D., Aeneas Medical Consulting, LLC. E-mail: davidsahner@yahoo.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 219 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 218-219 Sahner, D. Response to the Commentary of Nils J. Nilsson on “Human Consciousness and Selfhood” Most importantly, I think the field of AI will have to grapple with the virtually infinite, chaotic, and changeable metabolic and organizational complexity that underlies human sensation - and this does not reside merely in the brain, of course. This is extensively covered in section D in the list of challenges faced by AI outlined in my manuscript. For the reasons stated in my paper, I don't think computational approaches will be able to faithfully mimic the goings on in the human nervous system. Fold in the remainder of the human body serving as the link between a mutable environment (and its uniquely human cultural trappings) and the central nervous system, and the cliff to climb becomes even more glassy and vertically inclined. In truth, the interactions are bidirectional among components of this triad (i.e., body with mind, mind with environment through the body). Human meaning is tied to metaphors that are grounded in uniquely human physicality, notwithstanding the existence of machines with, for example, more sensitive auditory sensors. In the context of a highly stimulating string of email exchanges with Nils Nilsson, he assessed the “complexity” argument adduced above (and far more explicitly described in my manuscript) as the strongest one on offer in my paper. In summary, I would not deny the possibility of machine consciousness in the future. My contention is more modest. I don't believe that consciousness, if it does evolve in machines, is at all likely to faithfully replicate the human brand of consciousness. That is to say, I have grave doubts about the likelihood of achieving broadly instantiated human-level AI (perhaps a much better term might be "human-quality" AI) and attendant human consciousness in an artificial complex system. In an effort to produce consciousness in silico, perhaps we can rely upon the precedent set by the evolution of human consciousness. That is, create a large number of "embodied" and self-replicating artificial complex systems with genuine and perishable "skin in the game." Note that I use that idiomatic expression with great purpose here. Engender competition for mates and resources and engineer a milieu in which cooperation among conspecifics is evolutionarily adaptive. Perhaps let these creatures interact for a few millennia and then, maybe one day, come back to ask one of them how it "feels" to be alive. You may get a very meaningful answer. References Nilsson, N. J. (2011), Commentary on David Sahner’s “Human Consciousness and Selfhood.” JCER V2(2): pp. 214-215. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 46-49 Oliver, A. Addressing the Hard Problem 46 Article Inaugural Issue Addressing the Hard Problem Alan Oliver ABSTRACT This problem (as I understand it) is essentially the difficulty we have in explaining how consciousness arises in the brain. Science has developed technology which has enabled researchers to relate brain activity to electrical and chemical events within the brain, and through carefully designed experiments these events have been shown some consistency with the theory of how the brain works. That consciousness is real is obvious enough, and we don’t need a theory to prove its existence. Moreover, the activity mentioned above is easily related to the brain having fairly predictable responses to external inputs (sensory) and internal activity co-incident with thought. The fact that we personally have no conscious awareness of the external world during periods of anaesthesia or head trauma seems to validate the view that consciousness is a process in the brain. In a paper appearing in this issue and entitled “The Principle of Existence”, the authors submit a model which I believed was similar to that given in The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali by Pandit Usharbuddh Arya. I have appended the Yoga Model of the entry of consciousness into matter (Fig.1). The reason I found their paper similar to the Yoga Model was that both seemed to progress through the same or similar steps in a journey from prespacetime to the everyday reality in which we and the Hard Problem exist. Key Words: consciousness, hard problem, Yoga Sutras, Patanjali 1. Introduction1 While I don’t expect to provide a silver bullet for this problem, I can at least provide another viewpoint not easily explored by many in this field. My reason for offering an opinion is that this information has existed for millennia; the reason it has not been embraced is probably due to the amount of discipline required to access and validate it. Science is very aware of savants and people with other cognitive ‘gifts’ and perhaps I fall into some obscure category in the scientific ‘too hard’ basket. With an apparent lack of the ability to imagine as other do, I have used this deficit to examine an aspect of mind by comparing my experiences against those who are ‘normal.’ My experiences have all occurred during periods of one pointed concentration on another. In Yoga this is called Samapatti where two minds coalesce. An analogy is that of placing a red ruby alongside of a clear glass; the glass can appear to be red. It takes on some of the attributes of the ruby. That coalescence ceases Correspondence: Cr. Alan J. Oliver, 9 Mason Street, Port Elliot, South Australia 5212. E-mail: thinkerman1@bigpond.com ISSN: when the ruby is removed. Yoga uses the term, ‘being in the presence of’ throughout its description of the process shown by the Yoga Model (Fig.1), and it is central to an alternative view of consciousness. 2. An Alternative View of Consciousness We are mostly aware of both our inner and external environment during our waking life, and the universal view is that our consciousness is in our mind. By that we take as a given that our mind is in our brain, a view which is strengthened through our science and technology. What can be equally true, without having to refute any of the science and technology, is the notion that whatever is conscious can be conscious without having its origins in the brain. I accept this is a leap of some magnitude for some and shall endeavor to use my deficit to explain my reasoning, with some help from the Yoga diagram. That two minds can coalesce is supported by both my experiences and by the evidence given by Patanjali and others for millennia. The difficulty for someone wishing to Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 46-49 Oliver, A. Addressing the Hard Problem prove this lies in the effort needed to achieve the state of consciousness necessary for Samapatti. In my case I appear to have been born that way, for whatever reason. Having this has made life difficult for others around me as well as for myself and it has taken a long time to come to terms with, mainly through sustained searching to a description of the condition. The Yoga Model shows consciousness spread across the whole figure, acquiring different attributes at every level. Yoga also gave me a description of two kinds of memory which allowed me to pin down why I cannot imagine or recreate a memory to revisit past feelings. As I explained in my book (Oliver, 2006), in October 2000 I felt intense bliss as I sat at the bedside of my dying daughter and afterward I could only have that memory as a narrative. This is not a recent development. In 1957 while traveling in a military aircraft, I happened to stand on a hatch in the floor. It dropped suddenly about 2 millimeters and I had quite a fright. When I reached the pilot he remarked that I was as white as a sheet. When I spoke to colleagues the following day the memory was just a narrative that ‘this happened and I got a fright’. The more common form of memory is that in which the object of the memory is primary and the instrument and process of apprehension are less obvious in our awareness. With that kind of memory I would have obviously recreated the experience of fright. Both Samapatti and the less usual kind of memory have one thing in common, and that is the instrument and process of apprehension. The instrument of apprehension is the sensory input to the brain, while the process of apprehension is the body/brain ‘being in the presence of’ the mind. In my case, what is missing from both is the sense of self, or Ego, as it is shown on the Yoga diagram. This lack of ego is the state Yogis seek through discipline to reach the states of Samadhi and Samapatti. It explains why my mind is mostly empty and why most people think I am calm and serene. The point I want to make is that my deficit is actually the result of having been born with a different ratio of I-Am-ness for whatever reason. I do not think of myself as anything, and find it difficult to believe I am any different at all. ISSN: 47 What I think it shows is the pivotal role played by just where our being is placed the Yoga. For most people I-AM means this body, person, role, my assets, beliefs and so on; not necessarily in a conscious way, it is more a ground of being. 3. The Hard Problem Getting back to the Hard Problem, it does not have to be hard at all when we can relate consciousness to the Yoga diagram. Since two minds can coalesce then it is likely that consciousness is spread across the whole Model; as David Bohm said it ‘all matter contains all information’. How we personalize this information is through self-identity, as demonstrated when the seer sets aside his/her identity and identifies on the subject, causing the two minds to coalesce. If all information is in all matter, then all living tissue has consciousness within it. What creates the impression of individuality is the selfidentity which differentiates one entity’s experience from another. At the level of body tissue this self-identified consciousness (Mind) initiates psychophysical responses through ‘being in the presence of’ while in utero and continues afterwards, aided by mother and the whole family/social/culture. Of course what is in the genes has a lot to do with setting up the receiver to respond to imaginary inputs and I won’t attempt to guess what or how it all works. If we read the work of practitioners exploring treatments for stroke victims based on the apparent brain plasticity it is clear that the stroke victim can re-educate the brain to recover some of their lost motor abilities. I would suspect that part of the input to the brain in these cases is the conscious effort to move the disabled limb, as well as the therapist moving that limb through some external assistance. Thus, it is probably not just the case of the neural network being plastic in the sense of transposing motor function to another part of the brain. It is likely that the mind too has to recognize the availability of the whole brain at its disposal to achieve the result. In the womb the brain of the fetus is in the presence of the mother’s nervous system and the fetus’ movements can respond the information in whose presence it is growing and being educated. During gestation the fetus is Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 46-49 Oliver, A. Addressing the Hard Problem connected to the mother to the extent I suggest it would be reasonable to say it is the same organism. If this suggestion is a valid one, then the movements of the fetus are really driven by the mother’s mind (from the level of Mahat). Of course she is not always aware of this because most of her awareness (as distinct from her consciousness) is distributed across the tasks in hand at any particular time. Taking this notion of fetus as part of mother a little further, it can explain how mothers know intuitively when the new infant is distressed while out of her sight, and why ‘mothers just know’ when a child is doing something unacceptable. It is hardly surprising then that women, mothers in particular, are so intuitive. The same situation applies to the documented awareness an identical twin can have of its twin, even when they are thousands of miles apart. 4. Conclusion In a paper appearing in this issue and entitled “The Principle of Existence” (Hu & Wu, 2010), the authors submit a model which I believed is similar to that given in The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali by Pandit Usharbuddh Arya. I have appended the Yoga Model of the entry of consciousness into matter. The reason I found their paper similar to the Yoga Model (Fig.1) was that both seemed to progress through the same References Oliver, A. J. Thinking on the Other Side of Zero (Australian National Library: LD06/5742, 2006); also see http://vixra.org/abs/1001.0015 ISSN: 48 or similar steps in a journey from pre-Space/time to the everyday reality in which we and the Hard Problem exist. My conclusion therefore is offered as an opinion on the Hard Problem, with the following observation. Scientists and philosophers have set themselves a difficult task in this because they generally search for the answer within a context which says it must conform to a fairly narrow set of parameters. If the only acceptable answer to the Hard Problem must involve Mind as being a product of brain activity, then it will remain a problem. We can recognise the process of setting parameters of where an answer must be found; it is called AHAMKARA on the diagram, and I guess it is a risk to step outside the boundaries of what everyone in the science fraternity holds dear. The Hindu tradition has a parable about a man looking for his house keys on a dark night. He is on the ground crawling around on hands and knees beneath a street lamp. Some passers by ask if they can help and he says no ; the keys are over there somewhere. The others ask why he is looking where he is looking abd he replies that the light is here. Hu, H. & Wu, M. The principle of existence: toward a science of consciousness. JCER; 1 :1 pp50-119. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 1 | Page 46-49 Oliver, A. Addressing the Hard Problem 49 Fig.1 Yoga Model ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

745 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies Review Article Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies Peter Hankins* ABSTRACT I run a blog entitled “Conscious Entities” at http://consciousentities.com which is devoted to short discussions of some of the major thinkers and theories about consciousness. This is another small collection of my writings on consciousness which the editor of JCER very kindly selected to appear here. It contains my short accounts of six major thinkers in consciousness studies including Daniel Dennet, John Searle, David Chalmers, Colin McGinn, Roger Penrose & Gerald Edelman. In reading the books of these writers, I found I had views which were very clear, but also completely contradictory; so these pieces are written in the form of dialogues between a character I call Bitbucket (represented by the abacus) who is a hard-line materialist computational reductionist, and Blandula (the cherub) who leans towards dualism and mysterianism. (The last few words of each article, by the way, are actually quotes from the subject himself.) Key Words: consciousness studies, people, Daniel Dennet, John Searle, David Chalmers, Colin McGinn, Roger Penrose, Gerald Edelman. 1. Daniel Dennett Dennett is the great demystifier of consciousness. According to him there is, in the final analysis, nothing fundamentally inexplicable about the way we attribute intentions and conscious feelings to people. We often attribute feelings or intentions metaphorically to non-human things, after all. We might say our car is a bit tired today, or that our pot plant is thirsty. At the end of the day, our attitude to other human beings is just a version – a much more sophisticated version – of the same strategy. Attributing intentions to human animals makes it much easier to work out what their behaviour is likely to be. It pays us, in short, to adopt the intentional stance when trying to understand human beings. This isn’t the only example of such a stance, of course. A slightly simpler example is the special ‘design stance’ we adopt towards machines when we try to understand how they work (that is, by assuming that they do something useful which can be guessed from their design and construction). An axe is just a lump of wood and iron, but we naturally ask ourselves what it could be for, and the answer (chopping) is evident. A third stance is the basic physical one we adopt when we try to predict how something will behave just by regarding it as a physical object and applying the laws of physics to Correspondence: Peter Hankins, Conscious Entities at http://consciousentities.com, London, UK. E-mail: peter@consciousentities.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 746 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies it. It’s instructive to notice that when we adopt the design stance towards an axe, we don’t assume that the axe is magically imbued with spiritual axehood: but at the same time its axehood is uncontroversially a fact. If we only understood things this way all the time, we should find the real nature of people and thoughts no more worrying than the real nature of axes. One day there could well be machines which fully justify our adopting the intentional stance towards them and hence treating them like human beings. With some machines, some of the time, and up to a point, we do this already, (think of computer chess) but Dennett would not predict the arrival of a robot with full human-style consciousness for a while yet. So it’s all a matter of explanatory stances. But doesn’t that mean that people are not ‘real’, just imaginary constructions? Well, are centres of gravity real? We know that forces really act on every part of a given body, but it makes it much easier, and no less accurate, if our calculations focus on a single average point. People are a bit like that. There are a whole range of separate processes going on in the relevant areas of your brain at any one time – producing a lot of competing ‘multiple drafts’ of what you might think, or say. Your actual thoughts or speech emerge from this competition between rival versions – a kind of survival of the fittest, if you like. The intentional stance helps us work out what the overall result will be. The ‘overall result’? But it’s not as if the different versions get averaged out, is it? I thought with the multiple drafts idea one draft always won at the expense of all the others. That’s one of the weaknesses of the idea – if one ‘agent’ can do the drafting on its own, why would you have several? It’s just more effective to have several competing drafts on the go, and then pick the best. It’s a selective process, comparable in some respects to evolution – or a form of parallel processing, if you like. ‘Pick the best’? I don’t see how it can be the best in the sense of being the most cogent or useful thought or utterance – it’s just the one that grabs control. The only way you could guarantee it was the best would be to have some function judging the candidates. But that would be the kind of central control which the theory of multiple drafts is supposed to do away with. Moreover, if there is a way of judging good results, there surely ought to be a way of generating only good ones to begin with – hence again no need for the wasteful multiple process. I’m always suspicious when somebody invokes ‘parallel processing’. At the end of the day, I think you’re forced to assume some kind of unified controlling process. Absolutely not- and this is a key point of Dennett’s theory. None of this means there’s a fixed point in the brain where the drafts are adjudicated and the thinking gets done. One of the most seductive delusions about consciousness is that somewhere there is a place where a picture of the world is displayed for a ‘control centre’ to deal with – the myth of the ‘Cartesian Theatre’. There is no such privileged place; no magic homunculus who turns inputs into outputs. I realise that thinking in terms of a control centre is a habit it’s hard to break, but it’s an error you have to put aside if we’re ever going to get anywhere with consciousness. Another pervasive error, while we’re on the subject, is the doctrine of ‘qualia’ – the private, incommunicable redness of red or indescribable taste of a particular wine. Qualia are meant to be the part of an experience which is left over if you subtract all the objective bits. When you look at something blue, for example, you acquire the information that it is blue: but you also, say the qualophiles, see blue. That blue you really see is an example of qualia, and who knows, they ask, whether the blue qualia you personally experience are the same as those which impinge on someone else? Now qualia cannot have any causal effects (otherwise we should be able to find objective ways of signalling to each other which quale we meant). This has the absurd consequence that any words written or spoken about them were not, in fact, caused by the qualia themselves. There has been a long and wearisome series of philosophical papers about inverted spectra, zombies, hypothetical twin worlds and the like which purport to prove the existence of qualia. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 747 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies For many people, this first person, subjective, qualia-ridden experience is what consciousness is all about; the mysterious reason why computers can never deserve to be regarded as conscious. But, Dennett says, let’s be clear: there are no such things as qualia. There’s nothing in the process of perception which is ultimately mysterious or outside the normal causal system. When I stand in front of a display of apples, every last little scintilla of subtle redness is capable of influencing my choice of which one to pick up. It’s easy to deny qualia if you want to. In effect you just refuse to talk about them. But it’s a bit sad. Qualia are the really interesting, essential part of consciousness: the bit that really matters. Dennett says we’ll be alright if we stick to the third-person point of view (talking about how other people’s minds work, rather than talking about our own); but it’s our own, first-person sensations and experiences that hold the real mystery, and it’s a shame that Dennett should deny himself the challenge of working on them. I grant you qualia are grist to the mill of academic philosophers – but that’s never been any sign that an issue was actually real, valid, or even interesting. But in any case, Dennett hasn’t excluded himself from anything. He proposes that instead of mystifying ourselves with phenomenology we adopt a third-person version – heterophenomenology. In other words, instead of trying to talk about our ineffable inner experiences, we should talk about what people report as being their ineffable inner experiences. When you think about it, this is really all we can do in any case. That’s Dennett in a nutshell. Actually, it isn’t possible to summarise him that compactly: one of his great virtues is his wide range. He covers more aspects of these problems than most and manages to say interesting things about all of them. Take the frame problem – the difficulty computer programs have in dealing with teeming reality and the ‘combinatorial explosion’ which results. This is a strong argument against Dennett’s computation-friendly views: yet the best philosophical exposition of the problem is actually by Dennett himself. Mm. If you ask me, he’s a bit too eager to cover lots of different ideas. In ‘Consciousness Explained’ he can’t resist bringing in memes as well as the intentional stance, though it’s far from clear to me that the two are compatible. Surely one theory at a time is enough, isn’t it? Even Putnam disavows his old theory when he adopts a new one. It seems to me that a complete account of consciousness is going to need more than one theoretical insight. Dennett’s broad range means he’s said useful things on a broader range of topics than anyone else. Even if you don’t agree with him, you must admit that that sceptical view about qualia, for example, desperately needed articulating. And it typifies the other thing I like about Dennett. He’s readable, clear, and original, but above all he really seems as if he wants to know the truth, whereas most of the philosophers seem to enjoy elaborating the discussion far more than they enjoy resolving it. His theory may seem strange at first, but after a while I think it starts to seem like common sense. Take the analogy with centres of gravity. People must be something like this in the final analysis, mustn’t they? On the one hand we’re told the self is a mysterious spiritual entity which will always be beyond our understanding: on the other side, some people tell us paradoxically that the self is an illusion. I don’t think either of these positions is easy to believe: by contrast, the idea of the self as a centre of narrative gravity just seems so sensible, once you’ve got used to it. The problem is, it’s blindingly obvious that whether something is conscious or not doesn’t depend on our stance towards it. Dennett realises, of course, that we can’t make a bookshelf conscious just by giving it a funny look, but the required theory of what makes something a suitable target for the stance (which is really the whole point) never gets satisfactorily resolved in my view, in spite of some talk about ‘optimality’. And that business about centres of gravity. A centre of gravity ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 748 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies acts as a kind of average for forces which actually act on millions of different points. Well there really are people like that – legal ‘persons’, the contractual entitities who provide a vehicle for the corporate will of partnerships, companies, groups of hundreds of shareholders and the like. But surely it’s obvious that these legal fictions, which we can create or dispel arbitrarily whenever we like, are entirely different to the real people who invented them, and on whom, of course, they absolutely depend. The fact is, Dennett’s view remains covertly dependent on the very same intuitive understanding of consciousness it’s meant to have superseded. You can imagine a disciple running into problems like this… Disciple: Dan, I’ve absorbed and internalised your theory and at last I really understand and believe it fully. But recently I’ve been having a difficulty. Dennett: What’s that? Disciple: Well, I can’t seem to adopt the intentional stance any more. Dennett: Wow. It’s really very simple. Deep breaths now. Look at the target (use me if you like). Now just attribute to me some plausible conscious states and intentions. Disciple: But… What would that be like? What are conscious states? For you to have conscious states just means I can usefully deal with you as if you had … conscious states. I seem to be caught in a kind of vicious circle unless I just somehow know what conscious states are… Dennett: Steady now. Just think, what would I be likely to do if I had the kind of real, original intentions which people talk about? How would things with intentions behave? Disciple: I have no idea. There are no things with real intentions. I’m not even sure any more what ‘real intentions’ means… Yes, very amusing I’m sure. I suppose I can sympathise with you to some extent. Grasping Dennett’s ideas involves giving up a lot of cherished and ingrained notions, and I’m afraid you’re just not ready (or perhaps able) to make the effort. But the suggestion that Dennett doesn’t tell us what makes something a good target for the intentional stance is a shocking misrepresentation. It could hardly be more explicit. Anything which implements a ‘Joycean machine’ is conscious. This Joycean machine is the thing, the program if you like, which produces the multiple drafts. The idea is that consciousness arises when we turn on ourselves the mechanisms and processes we use to recognise and understand other people. Crudely put, consciousness is a process of talking to ourselves about ourselves: and it’s that that makes us susceptible to explanation through the intentional stance. It’s all perfectly clear. You obviously haven’t grasped the point about optimality, either. Suppose you’re playing chess. How do you guess what the other player is likely to do? The only safe thing to do is to assume he will make the best possible move, the optimal move. In effect, you attribute to him the desire to win and the intention of out-playing you, and that helps dramatically in the task of deciding which pieces he is likely to move. Intentional systems, entities which display this kind of complex optimality, deserve to be regarded as conscious to that extent. Yes, yes, I understand. But how do you know what behaviour is optimal? Things can’t just be inherently optimal: they’re only optimal in the light of a given desire or plan. In the case of a game of chess, we take it for granted that someone just wants to win (though it ain’t necessarily so): but in real-life contexts it’s much more difficult. Attributing desires and beliefs to people arbitrarily won’t help us predict their behaviour. Our ability to get the right ones depends on an in-built understanding of consciousness which Dennett does not explain. In fact it springs from empathy: we imagine the beliefs and desires we would have in their place. If we hadn’t got real beliefs and desires ourselves, the whole stance business wouldn’t work. It isn’t empathy we rely on – at least, not what you mean by empathy. The process of evolution has fitted out human beings with similar basic sets of desires (primarily, to survive and reproduce) which can be taken for granted and used as the basis for deductions about behaviour. I ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 749 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies don’t by any means suggest the process is simple or foolproof (predicting human behaviour is often virtually impossible) just that treating people as having conscious desires and beliefs is a good predictive strategy. As a matter of fact, even attributing incorrect desires and beliefs would help us falsify some hypotheses more efficiently than trying to predict behaviour from brute physical calculation. Speaking of evolution, it occurs to me that a wider perspective might help you see the point. Dennett’s views can be seen as carrying on a long-term project of which the theory of evolution formed an important part. This is the gradual elimination of teleology from science. In primitive science, almost everything was explained by attributing consciousness or purpose to things: the sun rose because it wanted to, plants grew in order to provide shade and food, and so on. Gradually these explanations have been replaced by better, more mechanical ones. Evolution was a huge step forward in this process, since it meant we could explain how animals had developed without the need to assume that conscious design was part of the process. Dennett’s work takes that kind of thinking into the mind itself. Yes, but absurdly! It was fine to eliminate conscious purposes from places where they had no business, but to eliminate them from the one place where they certainly do exist, the mind, is perverse. It’s as though someone were to say, well, you know, we used to believe the planets moved because they were gods; then we came to realise they weren’t themselves conscious beings, but we still believed they were moved by angels. After a while, we learnt how to do without the angels: now it’s time to take the final step and admit that, actually, the planets don’t move. That would be no more absurd that Dennett’s view that, as he put it, ‘we are all zombies’. A palpably false analogy: and as for the remark about zombies, it is an act of desperate intellectual dishonesty to quote that assertion out of context! 2. John Searle Searle is a kind of Horatius, holding the bridge against the computationalist advance. He deserves a large share of the credit for halting, or at least checking, the Artificial Intelligence bandwagon which, until his paper ‘Minds, Brains and Programs’ of 1980 seemed to be sweeping ahead without resistance. Of course, the project of “strong AI” (a label Searle invented), which aims to achieve real consciousness in a machine, was never going to succeed , but there has always been (and still is) a danger that some half-way convincing imitation would be lashed together and then hailed as conscious. The AI fraternity has a habit of redefining difficult words in order to make things easier. Terms for things which, properly understood, imply understanding, and which computers can’t, therefore, handle – are redefined as simpler things which computers can cope with. At the time Searle wrote his paper, it looked as if “understanding” might quickly go the same way, with claims that computers running certain script-based programs could properly be said to exhibit at least a limited understanding of the things and events described in their pre-programmed scenarios. If this creeping debasement of the language had been allowed to proceed unchallenged, it would not have been long ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 750 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies before ‘conscious’, ‘person’ and all of the related moral vocabulary were similarly subverted, with dreadful consequences. After all, if machines can be people, people can be regarded as merely machines, with all that implies for our attitude to using them and switching them on or off Are you actually going to tell us anything about Searle’s views, or is this just a general sermon? Searle’s main counter-stroke against the trend was the famous ‘Chinese Room’ . This has become the most famous argument in contemporary philosophy; about the only one which people who aren’t interested in philosophy might have heard of. A man is locked up, given a lot of data in Chinese characters, and runs by hand a program which answers questions in Chinese. He can do that easily enough (given time), but since he doesn’t understand Chinese, he doesn’t understand the questions or the answers he’s generating. Since he’s doing exactly what a computer would do, the computer can’t understand either. The trouble with the so-called Chinese Room argument is that it isn’t an argument at all. It’s perfectly open to us to say that the man in the machine understands the Chinese inputs if we want to. There is a perfectly good sense in which a man with a code book understands messages in code. However, that isn’t the line I take myself. It’s clearto me that the ‘systems’ response, which Searle quotes himself, is the correct diagnosis. The man alone may not understand, but the man plus the program forms a system which does. Now elsewhere, Searle stresses the importance of the first person point of view, but if we apply that here we find he’s hoist with his own petard. What’s the firstperson view of whatever entity is answering the questions put to the room? Suppose instead of just asking about the story, we could ask the room about itself: who are you, what can you see? Do you think the answer would be ‘I’m this man trapped in a room manipulating meaningless symbols’? Of course not. To answer questions about the man’s point of view, the program would need to elicit his views in a form he understood, and if it did that it would no longer be plausible that the man didn’t know what was going on. The answers are clearly coming from the system, or in any case from some other entity, not from the man. So it isn’t the man’s understanding which is the issue. Of course the man, without the program, doesn’t understand. In just the same way, nobody claims an unprogrammed computer can understand anything. But even as a purely persuasive story, I don’t think it works. Searle doesn’t specify how the instructions used by the man in the room work: we just know they do work. But this is important. If the program is simple or random, we probably wouldn’t think any understanding was involved. But if the instructions have a high degree of complexity and appear to be governed by some sophisticated overall principle, we might have a different view. With the details Searle gives, I actually think it’s hard to have any strong intuitions one way or the other. Actually, Searle never claimed it was a logical argument, only a gedankenexperiment. So far as details of how the instructions work, it’s pretty clear in the original version that Searle means the kind of program developed by Roger Schank: but it doesn’t matter much, because it’s equally clear that Searle draws the conclusion for any possible computer program. Whatever you think about the story’s persuasiveness, it has in practice been hugely influential. Whether they like it or not (and some of them certainly don’t), all the people in the field of Artificial Intelligence have had to confront it and provide some kind of answer. This in itself represented a radical change; up to that point they had not even had to talk about the sceptical case. The angriness of some of the exchanges on this subject is remarkable (it’s fair to say that Searle’s tone in the first place was not exactly emollient) and Searle and Dennett have become the Holmes and Moriarty of the field – which is which depends on your own opinion. At the same time, it’s fair to say that those of a ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 751 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies sceptical turn of mind often speak warmly of Searle, even if they don’t precisely agree with him – Edelman , for example, and Colin McGinn . But if the Chinese Room specifically doesn’t work for you, it doesn’t matter that much. In the end, Searle’s point comes down to the contention – surely unarguable – that you can’t get syntax from semantics. Just shuffling symbols around according to formal instructions can never result in any kind of understanding. But that is what the whole argument is about! By merely asserting that, you beg the question. If the brain is a machine, it seems obvious to me that mechanical operations must be capable of yielding whatever the brain can yield. Well, let’s try a different tack. The Chinese Room is so famous, it tends to overshadow Searle’s other views, but as you mentioned, he puts great emphasis on the first-person perspective, and regards the problem of qualia as fundamental. In fact, in arguing with Dennett, he has said that it is the problem of consciousness. This is perhaps surprising at first glance, because the Chinese Room and its associated arguments about semantics are clearly to do with meaning, not qualia. But Searle thinks the two are linked. Searle has detailed theories about meaning and intentionality which are arguably far more interesting (and if true, important) than the Chinese Room. It’s difficult to do them justice briefly, but if I understand correctly, he analyses meaning in terms of intentionality (which in philosophy means aboutness ), and intentionality is grounded in consciousness. How the consciousness gets added to the picture remains an acknowledged mystery, and actually it’s one of Searle’s virtues that he is quite clear about that. His hunch is that it has something to do with particular biological qualities of the brain, and he sees more scientific research as the way forward. One of Searle’s main interests is the way certain real and important entities (money, football) exist because someone formally declared that they did, or because we share a common agreement that they do. He thinks meaning is partly like that. The difference between uttering a string of noises and meaning something by them is that in the latter case we perform a kind of implicit declaration in respect of them. In Searle’s terminology, each formula has conditions of satisfaction, the conditions which make it true or false: when we mean it, we add conditions of satisfaction to the conditions of satisfaction. This may sound a bit obscure, but for our purposes Searle’s own terminology is dispensable: the point is that meaning comes from intentions. This is intuitively clear – all it comes down to is that when we mean what we say, we intend to say it. So where does intentionality, and intentions in particular, come from? The mystery of intentionality – how anything comes to be about anything – is one of the fundamental puzzles of philosophy. Searle stresses the distinction between original and derived intentionality. Derived intentionality is the aboutness of words or pictures – they are about something just because someone meant them to be about something, or interpreted them as being about something: they get their intentionality from what we think about them. Our thoughts themselves, however, don’t depend on any convention, they just are inherently about things. According to Searle, this original intentionality develops out of things like hunger. The basic biochemical processes of the brain somehow give rise to a feeling of hunger, and a feeling of hunger is inherently about food. Thus, in Searle’s theory, the two basic problems of qualia and meaning are linked. The reason computers can’t do semantics is because semantics is about meaning; meaning derives from original intentionality, and original intentionality derives from feelings – qualia – and computers don’t have any qualia. You may not agree, but this is surely a most comprehensive and plausible theory. Except that both qualia and intrinsic intentionality are incoherent myths! How can anything just be inherently about anything? Searle’s account falls apart at several stages. He acknowledges he has no idea how the biomechanical processes of the brain give rise to ‘real feelings’ of hunger, and he ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 752 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies also has no account of how these real feelings then prompt action. In fact, of course, the biomechanical story of hunger does not suddenly stop at some point: it flows on smoothly into the biomechanical processes of action, of seeking food and of eating. Nothing in that process is fundamentally mysterious, and if we want to say that a real feeling of hunger is involved in causing us to eat, we must say that it is part of that fully-mechanical, computable, non-mysterious process – otherwise we will be driven into epiphenomenalism . When you come right down to it, I just do not understand what motivates Searle’s refusal to accept common sense. He agrees that the brain is a machine, he agrees that the answer is ultimately to be found in normal biological processes, and he has a well-developed theory of how social processes can give rise to real and important entities. Why doesn’t he accept that the mind is a product of just those physical and social processes? Why do we need to postulate inherent meaningfulness that doesn’t do any work, and qualia that have no explanation? Why not accept the facts – it’s the system that does the answering in the Chinese Room, and it’s a system that does the answering in our heads! It is not easy for me to imagine how someone who was not in the grip of an ideology would find that idea at all plausible! 3. David Chalmers With ‘The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory’ David Chalmers introduced a radical new element into the debate about consciousness when it was perhaps in danger of subsiding into unproductive trench warfare. Many found some force in his arguments; others have questioned whether they are particularly new or effective, but even if you don’t agree with him, the energising effect of his intervention can still be welcomed. Chalmers believes (and of course he’s not alone in this respect) that there are two problems of consciousness. One is to do with how sensory inputs get processed and turned into appropriate action; the other is the problem of qualia – why is all that processing accompanied by sensations, and what are these vivid sensations, anyway? He calls the first the ‘easy’ problem and the second, which is the real focus of his attention, the ‘hard’ problem. Chalmers is careful to explain that he doesn’t mean the ‘easy’ problem is trivial, just nothing like as mind-boggling as qualia, the redness of red, the ineffably subjective aspect of experience. The real point, in any case, is his view of the ‘hard’ problem, and here the unusual thing about Chalmers’ theory is the extent to which he wants to take on two views which are normally seen as opposed. He wants behaviour to be explainable in terms of a materialist, functionalist theory, operating within the normal laws of physics: in fact, he ends up seeing no particular barrier to the successful creation of consciousness in a computer. But he also wants qualia which remain mysterious in some respects and which appear to have no causal effects. He doesn’t quite commit himself on this last point: the causal question remains open (qualia might over-determine events, for example, having a causal influence which is always in the shadow of similar influences from straightforward physical causes) and he does not sign up explicitly to epiphenomenalism (the view that our thoughts actually have no influence on our actions) – but he thinks the current arguments for the opposite views are ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 753 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies faulty. All the words in the mental vocabulary, on his view, acquire two senses: there is psychological pain, for example, which plays a full normal part in the chain of cause and effect, and affects our behaviour: and then there is phenomenal pain, which does not determine our actions, but which actually, you know, hurts . Chalmers is surely a dualist, because he believes in two kinds of fundamental stuff, and he is an epiphenomenalist, because he believes our thoughts and feelings have no real influence on the world. Neither of these positions makes sense. The book pulls its punches in these kinds of areas. He says he does not describe his view as epiphenomenalism, but that the alternatives to epiphenomenalism are wrong. Now if you believe the negation of a view is wrong, you have to believe the view is right, don’t you? And what is this ‘causal over-determination’ business? So an event is caused by some physical prior event, and also caused by the qualia – but it would have happened just the same way if the qualia weren’t there? Chalmers says there’s no proof this is true, but no real argument to disprove it, either. How about Occam’s Razor? A causal force which makes no difference to events is a redundant entity which ought to be excised from the theory. Otherwise we might as well add undetectable angels to the theory – hey, you can’t prove they don’t exist, because they wouldn’t make any difference to anything anyway. This aggressive attitude is out of place. I think you have to take on board that Chalmers is quite honest about not presenting a final answer to everything. What he’s about is taking the problems seriously. This has a certain resonance with many people. There was a gung-ho era of artificial intelligence when many people just ignored the philosophical problems, but by the time Chalmers published “The Conscious Mind” I think more were prepared to admit that maybe the problem of qualia was more substantial than they thought. Chalmers seemed to be speaking their language. Of course, this may be irritating to philosophers who may feel they had been going on about qualia for years without getting much attention. It irritates some of the philosophers even more (not necessarily a bad thing) when Chalmers adopts (or fails definitely to reject, anyway) views like epiphenomenalism, which they mostly regard as naive. But you really can’t say Chalmers is philosophically naive – he has an impressive command of technical philosophical issues and handles them with great aplomb. Oh, yes. All those pages of stuff about supervenience, for example. That’s exactly what I hate about philosophy – the gratuitous elaboration of pointless technical issues. I mean, even if we got all that stuff straight, it wouldn’t help one iota. We could spend years discussing whether, say, the driving of a car down the road supervenes under the laws of physics on the spark in the cylinder at time t, or under some conjunction of laws of modal counterfactuals, yet to be specified, with second-order laws of pragmatic engineering theory. Or some load of old tripe like that. It wouldn’t tell us how the engine works – but that’s what we want to know, and the same goes for the mind. Well, I’m sorry but you have to be prepared to take on some new and slightly demanding concepts if we’re going to get anywhere. We can’t get very far with naive ideas of cause and effect: the notion of supervenience gives us a way to unravel the issues and tackle them separately. I know this is difficult stuff to get to grips with, but we’re talking about difficult issues here. You just want the answer to be easy. Easy! It’s Chalmers who ignores the real problems. Look at dualism. It’s only worth accepting a second kind of stuff if it makes things easier to explain. If we could solve the problem of qualia by assuming they live in a different world, there might be some point. But we can’t: they’re just as hard to explain in a dualist world as they were in a monist, materialist one, and on top of that you have to explain how the two worlds relate to each other. Chalmers ends up with ‘bridging principles’, which ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 754 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies specify that phenomenal states always correspond with psychological ones. This sounds like Leibniz’s pre-established harmony between the spirit and body, but at least Leibniz had God to arrange things for him! Chalmers actually has no way of knowing whether psychological and phenomenal states correspond, because he only ever experiences one of them (which one depends on whether it’s Phenomenal Chalmers or Psychological Chalmers we’re talking about, I suppose). The final irony is that it’s Psychological Chalmers who writes the books, because that’s a physical, cause-and-effect matter: but his reasons for writing about qualia can’t be anything to do with qualia themselves, because he never experiences them – only Phenomenal Chalmers does that… And we haven’t even touched on the stuff about how thermostats feel, and the mysterious appeal of panpsychism. But really, the worst of it is that the problem he’s inviting people to ‘take seriously’ is the wrong one. The whole ‘problem of qualia’ is a delusion. On the contrary, it’s the whole point. You should read less Dennett and more by other people. Incidentally, it must be in Chalmers’ favour that neither Dennett nor his arch-enemy Searle has any time at all for Chalmers. He must be doing something right to attract opposition like that from both extremes, don’t you think? Two points, though. First, if we want to make any progress at all, it’s going to involve contemplating some weird-looking ideas. All the mainstream ones have been done already. Chalmers is all about opening up possibilities, not presenting a cast-iron finished theory. Second, you’re talking as if Chalmers took up dualism for no reason, but in fact he gives a whole series of arguments which explain why we’re forced to that conclusion. Argument 1: The logical possibility of zombies, people exactly like us but with no qualia. This is the main one, which puts in its simplest form Chalmers’ underlying point of view that qualia are separable from the normal physical account of the world, and so just must be something different.. Argument 2: The Inverted Spectrum. An old classic, which relies on the same basic insight as the first argument, ie that you could change the qualia without changing anything else. Arguments along these lines have been elaborated to the nth degree elsewhere, but Chalmers’ version is pretty clear. Argument 3: From epistemological asymmetry. Qualia just don’t look the same from the inside. When we examine the biology of our leg, it isn’t essentially different from examining someone else’s: but when we examine our own sensations, it bears no resemblance to observing the sensations of others. Argument 4: The knowledge argument. Our old friend Mary the colour scientist . Argument 5: The absence of analysis. This is simply a matter of putting the onus on the opposition to give an account of how qualia could possibly be physical. The main point of the main argument, very briefly, is that we can easily imagine a ‘zombie’: a person who has all the psychological stuff going on, but no subjective experience. At the very least, it’s logically possible that there should be such people. As a result, you cannot just identify the physical workings of the brain, the psychological aspect, with the subjective experience, the phenomenal aspect. I have to say I think this is essentially correct. There’s no way we can know whether something is logically possible unless we understand what we’re talking about. We need to know what phenomenal consciousness is before we can decide whether zombies without it are possible. Chalmers assumes it’s obvious that phenomenal experience isn’t physical, and hence it’s obvious we could have zombies. But this just begs the question. I assume phenomenal experience is a physical process, so it’s obvious to me that there couldn’t, logically, be a person who was physically identical to me without them having my experiences. Look at it this way. If Chalmers didn’t understand physics, he would probably find it easy to imagine that the molecules ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 755 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies inside him could move around faster without his temperature going up. But when he understands what temperature really is, he can see that it was logically impossible after all. Chalmers is really presenting intuitions disguised as arguments – alright, he’s not alone in that, but they’re dodgy intuitions, too. Look at that stuff about information. According to Chalmers, anything with a shape or marks on it, in fact anything at all, is covered in information – information about itself and how it got the way it is. We can speculate that any kind of information might give rise to consciousness: maybe even thermostats have a dim phenomenal life similar to just seeing different shades of grey. Since, on Chalmers’ interpretation of information, everything is covered in it, it follows that everything is in some degree conscious. The result? Panpsychism, a third untenable position… Chalmers does not actually endorse panpsychism, he just speculates about it. Do you think the idea is uninteresting ? Can you not accept that if philosophers aren’t allowed to speculate, they’re not going to achieve very much? And then, a chapter about the correct interpretation of quantum physics! What’s that about, then? Chalmers sees a kind of harmony between his views and one of the possible interpretations of quantum theory. I have no idea whether he’s on to anything, but this sort of linkage is potentially valuable, especially to philosophy,which has tended to cut itself off from contemporary science. But the point is, all these latter speculations are just that – interesting, stimulating speculations. Chalmers never pretends they’re anything else. The point of the book is to get people to take qualia seriously. That’s a good, well-founded project and I think even you would have to admit that the book has succeeded to a remarkable degree. If you ask me, Chalmers basically gives the whole thing away early on, when he says that another way of looking at the psychological/phenomenal distinction is to see them as the third-person and first-person views. Wouldn’t common sense suggest that this is just a case of a single phenomenon looked at from two different points of view? It seems the obvious conclusion to me. But if the mind-body problem has taught us anything, it is that nothing about consciousness is obvious, and that one person’s obvious truth is another person’s absurdity… 4. Colin McGinn Colin McGinn is probably the most prominent of the New Mysterians – people who basically offer a counsel of despair about consciousness. Look, he says, we’ve been at this long enough – isn’t it time to confess that we’re never going to solve the problem? Not that there’s anything magic or insoluble about it really: it’s just that our minds aren’t up to it. Everything has its limitations, and not ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 756 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies being able to understand consciousness just happens to be one of ours. Once we realise this, however, the philosophical worry basically goes away. McGinn doesn’t exactly mean that human beings are just too stupid; nor is he offering the popular but mistaken argument that the human brain cannot understand itself because containers cannot contain themselves (so that we can never absorb enough data to grasp our own workings). No: instead he introduces the idea of cognitive closure. This means that the operations the human mind can carry out are incapable in principle of taking us to a proper appreciation of what consciousness is and how it works. It’s as if, on a chess board, you were limited to diagonal moves: you could go all over the board but never link the black and white squares. That wouldn’t mean that one colour was magic, or immaterial. Equally, from God’s point of view, there’s probably no mystery about consciousness at all – it may well be a pretty simple affair when you understand it – but we can no more take the God’seye point of view than a dog could adopt a human understanding of physics. Isn’t all this a bit impatient? Philosophers have been chewing over problems like this quite happily for thousands of years. Suddenly, McGinn’s got to have the answer right now, or he’s giving up? Anyway, it’s the worst possible time to wave the white flag. The real reason these problems haven’t been solved before is not because the philosophy’s difficult – it’s because the science hasn’t been done. Brain science is difficult: you’re not allowed to do many kinds of experiment on human brains (and until fairly recently the tools to do anything interesting weren’t available anyway). But now things are changing rapidly, and we’re learning more and more about how the brain actually works every year. McGinn might well find he’s thrown the towel in just before the big breakthrough comes. A much better strategy would be to wait and see how the science develops. Once the scientists have described how the thing actually works, the philosophers can make some progress with their issues (if it matters). There’s more than just impatience behind this. McGinn points out that there are really only two ways of getting at consciousness: by directly considering one’s own consciousness through introspection, or through investigating the brain as a physical object. On either side we can construct new ideas along the same kind of lines, but what we need are ideas that bridge the two realms: about the best we can do in practice is some crude correlations of time and space. McGinn acknowledges a debt to Nagel , and you can see how these ideas might have developed out of Nagel’s views about the ineffability of bat experience. According to Nagel, we can never really grasp what it’s like to be a bat; some aspects of bathood are, as McGinn might put it, perceptually closed to us. Now if all our ideas stemmed directly from our perceptions (as is the case for a ‘Humean’ mind), this would mean that we suffered cognitive closure in respect of some ideas (‘batty’ ones, we could say). Of course, we’re not in fact limited to ideas that stem directly from perceptions; we can infer the existence of entities we can’t directly perceive. But McGinn says this doesn’t help. In explaining physical events, you never need to infer non-physical entities, and in analysing phenomenal experience you never need anything except phenomenal entities. So we’re stuck. It seems to me that if there were things we couldn’t perceive or infer, we wouldn’t be worried about them in the first place – what difference would they make to us? If the answers on consciousness are completely beyond us, surely the questions ought to be beyond us too. Dogs can’t understand Pythagoras, but that’s because they can’t grasp that there’s anything there to understand in the first place. Any entity which makes a difference to the world must have some observable effects, and unless the Universe turns out to be deeply inexplicable in some way, these effects must follow some lawlike ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 757 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies pattern. Once we’ve abserved the effects and identified the pattern, we understand the entities as far as they can be understood. If philosophers want to speculate about things that make no difference to the world, I can’t stop them – but it’s a waste of time. I’m afraid it’s perfectly possible that we might be capable of understanding questions to which we cannot understand the answers. Think of the chess board again (my analogy, I should say, not McGinn’s). A bishop only understands diagonal moves. He can see knights moving all over the board and at every step they move from the white realm to the black realm or vice versa. He can see spatial and chronological correlations (a bit fuzzy, but at least he knows knights never move from one side of the board to the other), and both the white and black realms are quite comprehensible to him in themselves. He can see definite causal relations operating between black and white squares (though he can’t predict very reliably which squares are available to any given knight). He just can’t grasp how the knights move from one to the other. It looks to him as if they pop out of nowhere, or rather, as if they have some strange faculty of Free Wheel. Yeah, yeah. It could be like that. But it isn’t. As a matter of fact, we can infer mental states from physical data – we do it all the time, whenever we work out someone’s attitude or intentions from what they’re doing or the way they look. McGinn should know this better than most, given his background in psychology. Or did he and his fellow psychologists rely entirely on people’s own reports of their direct phenomenal experience? It still seems like defeatism to me, anyway. It’s one thing to admit we don’t understand something yet, but there is really no need to jump to the conclusion that we never will. Even if I thought McGinn were right, I think I should still prefer the stance of continuing the struggle to understand. The point you’re not grasping is that in a way, showing that the answer is unattainable is itself also an answer. There’s nothing shameful about acknowledging our limitations – on the contrary. It is deplorably anthropocentric to insist that reality be constrained by what the human mind can conceive! 5. Roger Penrose Sir Roger Penrose is unique in offering something close to a proof in formal logic that minds are not merely computers. There is a kind of piquant appeal in an argument against the power of formal symbolic systems which is itself clothed largely in formal symbolic terms. Although it is this ‘mathematical’ argument, based on the famous proof by Gödel of the incompleteness of arithmetic, which has attracted the greatest attention, an important part of Penrose’s theory is provided by positive speculations about how consciousness might really work. He thinks that consciousness may depend on a new kind of quantum physics which we don’t, as yet, have a theory for, and suggests that the microtubules within brain cells might be the place where the crucial events take place. I think it must be admitted that his negative case against computationalism is much stronger than these positive theories. Besides the direct arguments about consciousness, Penrose’s two books on the subject feature ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 758 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies excellent and highly readable passages on fractals, tiling the plane, and many other topics. At times, it must be admitted, the relevance of some of these digressions is not obvious – I’m still not convinced that the Mandelbrot Set has anything to do with consciousness, for example – but they are all fascinating and remarkably lucid pieces in their own right. ‘The Emperor’s New Mind’ is particularly wide-ranging, and would be well worth reading even if you weren’t especially interested in consciousness, while a large part of ‘Shadows of the Mind’ is somewhat harder going, and focuses on a particular argument which purports to establish that “Human mathematicians are not using a knowably sound algorithm in order to ascertain mathematical truth”. I like the books myself, mostly, but I don’t find them convincing. Of course, people find a lengthy formal argument intimidating, especially from someone of Penrose’s acknowledged eminence. But does anyone seriously think this kind of highly abstract reasoning can tell us anything real about how things actually work? You don’t think maths tells us anything about the real world then? Well, let’s start with the Gödelian argument, anyway. Gödel proved the incompleteness of arithmetic, that is, that there are true statements in arithmetic which can never be proved arithmetically. Actually, the proof goes much wider than that. He provides a way of generating a statement, in any formal algebraic system, which we can see is true, but which cannot be proved within the system. Penrose’s point is that any mechanical, algorithmic, process is based on a formal system of some kind. So there will always be some truths that computers can’t prove – but which human beings can see are true! So human thought can’t be just the running of an algorithm. These unprovable truths are completely uninteresting ones, of course: the sort of thing Gödel produces are arid self-referential statements of no wider relevance. But in any case, the doctrine that people can always see the truth of any such Gödel statement is a mere assertion. In the simple cases Penrose considers, of course human beings can see the truth of the statements, but there’s no proof that the same goes for more complex ones. If we actually defined the formal system which brains are running on, I believe we might well find that the Gödel statement for that system really was beyond the power of brains to grasp. I don’t think that that could ever happen – it just doesn’t work like that. The complexity of the system in question isn’t really a factor. And in any case, brains are not ‘running on’ formal systems! Oh, but they have to be! I’m not suggesting the ‘program’ for any given brain is simple, but I can see three ways we could in principle construct it. 1. If we list all the sensory impressions and all the instructions to act that go into or out of a brain during a lifetime, we can treat them as inputs and outputs. Now there just must be some function, some algorithm, which produces exactly those outputs for those inputs. If nothing simpler is available (I’m sure it would be) there is always the algorithm which just lists the inputs to date and says ‘given these inputs, give this output’. 2. If you don’t like that approach, I reckon the way neurons work is sufficiently clear for us to construct a complete neuronal model of a brain (in principle – I’m not saying it’s a practical proposition); and then that would clearly represent an implementation of a complex function for the person in question. 3. As a last resort, we just model the whole brain in excruciating detail. It’s a physical object, and obeys the normal laws of physics, so we can construct a mechanical description of how it works. Any of these will do. The algorithms we come up with might well be huge and unwieldy, but they exist, which is all that matters. So we must be able to apply Gödel to people, too. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 759 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies Nonsense! For a start, I don’t believe ‘inputs’ and ‘outputs’ to human beings can be defined in those terms – reality is not digital. But the whole notion of a person’s own algorithm is absurd! The point about computers is that their algorithms are defined by a programmer and kept in a recognised place, clearly distinguished from data, inputs, and hardware, so it’s easy to say what they are in advance. With a brain, there is nothing you can point to in advance as the ‘brain algorithm’. If you insist on interpreting the brain as running an algorithm, you just have to wait and see which bits of the brain and which bits of the rest of the person and their environment turn out to be relevant to their ‘outputs’ in what ways and then construct the algorithm to suit. We can never know what the total algorithm is until all the inputs and outputs have been dealt with. In short, it turns out not to be surprising that a person can’t see the truth of their own Gödel statement, because they have to dead before anyone can even decide what it is! Alright, well look at it this way. We’re only talking about things that can’t be proved within a particular formal system. Humans can see the truth of these statements, and even prove them, because they go outside the formal system to do so. There’s no real reason why a computer can’t do the same. It may operate one algorithm to begin with, but it can learn and develop more comprehensive algorithms for itself as it goes. Why not? That’s the whole point! Human beings can always find a new way of looking at something, but an algorithm can’t. You can’t have an algorithm which generates new algorithms for itself, because if it did, the new bits would by definition be part of the original algorithm. I think it must be clear to anyone by now that you’re just playing with words. I still say that all this is simply too esoteric to have any bearing on what is essentially a practical computing problem. If I understand them correctly, both Dennett and your friend Searle agree with me (in their different ways). The algorithms in practical AI applications aren’t about mathematical proof, they’re about doing stuff. I was puzzled by Dennett’s argument in ‘Darwin’s dangerous idea’ in particular. He’s quite dismissive about the whole thing, but what he seems to say is this. The narrow set of algorithms picked out by Penrose may not be able to provide an arithmetical proof, but what about all the others which Penrose has excluded from consideration? This is strange, because the ones excluded from consideration, according to Dennett, are: algorithms which don’t do anything at all; algorithms which aren’t interesting; algorithms which aren’t about arithmetic; algorithms which don’t produce proofs; and algorithms which aren’t consistent! Can we reasonably expect proofs from any of these? Maybe not, says Dennett, but some of them might play a good game of chess… This seems to miss the point to me. What I fear is that this kind of reasoning leads to what I call the Roboteer’s argument (I’ve seen it put forward by people like Kevin Warwick and Rodney Brooks). The Roboteer says, OK, so computers will never work the way the human brain works. So what? That doesn’t mean they can’t be intelligent and it doesn’t mean they can’t be conscious. Planes don’t fly the way birds do, but we don’t say it isn’t proper flight because of that… Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with that argument. What about this quantum malarkey? You’re not going to tell me you go along with that? There is absolutely no reason to think quantum physics has anything to do with this. It may be hard to understand, but it’s just as calculable and deterministic as any other kind of physics. All there really is to this is that both consciousness and quantum physics seem a bit spooky. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 760 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies It isn’t conventional, established quantum physics we’re talking about. Having established that human thought goes beyond the algorithmic, Penrose needs to find a non-computable process which can account for it; but he doesn’t see anything in normal physics which fits the bill. He wants the explanation to be part of physics – you ought to sympathise with that – so it has to be in a new physical theory, and new quantum physics is the best candidate. Further strength is given to the case by the ideas Stuart Hameroff and he have come up with about how it might actually work, using the microtubules which are present in the structure of nerve cells. They’re present in most other kinds of cell, too, if I understand correctly. Microtubules have perfectly ordinary jobs to do within cells which have nothing to do with thinking. We don’t understand the brain completely, but surely we know by now that neurons are the things that do the basic work. It isn’t quite as clear as that. There has been a tendency, right since the famous McCulloch and Pitts paper of 1947, to see neurons as simple switches, but the more we know about them the less plausible that seems. Actually there is some highly complex chemistry involved. Personally, I would also say that the way neurons are organised looks very much like the sort of thing you might construct if you wanted to catch and amplify the effects of very small-scale events. One molecule – in the eye, one quantum, as Penrose points out – can make a neuron fire, and that can lead to a whole chain of other firings. At the end of the day, the problem is that quantum physics just doesn’t help. It doesn’t give us any explanatory resources we couldn’t get from normal physics. That’s too sweeping. There are actually several reasons, in my view, to think that quantum physics might be relevant to consciousness (although these are not Penrose’s reasons). One is that the way two different states of affairs can apparently be held in suspense resembles the way two different courses of action can be suspended in the mind during the act of choice. A related point is the possibility that exploiting this kind of suspension could give us spectacularly fast computing, which might explain some of the remarkable properties of the brain. Another is the special role of observation – becoming conscious of things – in causing the collapse of the wavefunction. A third is that quantum physics puts some limits on how precisely we can specify the details of the world, which seems to militate against the kind of argument you were making earlier, about modelling the brain in total detail. I know all of these are open to strong objections: the real reason, as I’ve already said, is just that quantum physics is the most likely place to find the kind of new science which Penrose thinks is needed. I don’t see it. It seems to me inevitable that any new physics that may come along is going to be amenable to simulation on a computer – if it wasn’t, it hardly seems possible it could be clear enough to be a reasonable theory. In other words, your mind is closed to any possibility except computationalism. Consciousness seems to me to be such an important phenomenon that I simply cannot believe it is something just ‘accidentally’ conjured up by a complicated computation… ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 761 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies 6. Gerald Edelman Gerald Edelman’s theories are rooted in neurology. In fact, he insists that this is the only foundation for a successful theory of consciousness: the answers are not to be found in quantum physics, philosophical speculation, or computer programming. The structure of the brain is accordingly a key factor. The neurons in the brain wire themselves up in complex and idiosyncratic patterns patterns during growth and then experience: no two people are wired the same way. The neurons do come to compose a number of structures, however. They form groups which tend to fire together, and for Edelman these groups are the basic operating unit of the brain. The other main structures are maps. An uncontroversial example here might be the way some sheets of neurons reproduce the pattern of activity on the retina at the back of the eye (with some stretching and squashing), but Edelman sees similar strucures as applying much more widely, and mapping not just sensory inputs, but each other and other kinds of neuronal activity. The whole system is bound together by re-entrant connections, sets of paths which provide parallel connections from group A to Group B and Group B back to Group A. The principle which makes this structure work is Neuronal Group Selection, or Neural Darwinism. Some patterns are reinforced by experience, while many others are eliminated in a selective process which resembles evolution. Edelman draws an analogy with the immune system, which produces a huge variety of random antibodies: those which link successfully to a foreign substance reproduce rapidly. This explains how the body can quickly produce antibodies for substances it has never encountered before (and indeed for substances which never existed in the previous history of the planet): and in an analogous way the Theory of Neuronal Group Selection (TNGS) explains how the brain can recognise objects in the world without having a huge inherited catalogue of patterns, and without an homunculus to do the recognising for it. The re-entrant connections between neuronal groups in different parts of the brain co-ordinate impressions from the different senses to provide a coherent, consistent, continuous experience; but re-entry is also the basic mechanism of recategorisation, the fundamental process by which the brain carves up the world into different things and recognises those it has encountered before. The word recategorisation is potentially confusing here for two reasons: first, it is not to be taken as implying the existence of a prior set of categories: in fact, every act of recognition modifies the category; nor is it meant to suggest any parallel with Kant’s categories, which limit how we can understand the world. Very much the reverse, in fact. Edelman attaches great importance to higher-order processes – concepts are maps of maps, and arise from the brain’s recategorising its own activity. Concepts by themselves only constitute primary (firstorder) consciousness: human consciousness also features secondary consciousness (concepts about concepts), language, and a concept of the self, all built on the foundation of first-order concepts. The final key idea in the theory, another one with a slightly misleading name isvalue, a word used here to describe inbuilt tendencies towards particular behaviour. These forms of behaviour may be driven ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 762 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies by what we value in a fairly straightforward sense – seeking food, for example, but they also include such inherent actions as the hand’s natural tendency to grasp. Edelman seems to think that, like a computer, if left to itself the brain might sit and do nothing. It’s the value systems which supply the basic drives. This sort of set-up has been modelled in a series of robots rather cheekily named Darwin I to IV. Edelman is emphatically opposed to the idea that the brain is a computer , however. Being anti-computationalist but using robots to support your theory seems a little strange. It needn’t be strictly contradictory, of course, but it does expose the curious fact that while Edelman insists the brain is not a computer, all the processes he describes seem perfectly capable of computerisation. He gives two reasons for not considering the brain a computer: one, that individual brains are wired up in very different ways; and two, that reality is not an orderly program feeding into the brain. Neither of these is convincing. Computers can differ enormously in physical detail while remaining essentially the same – how much similarity is there between a PC and a model Turing machine, for example – and wiring differences between brains might perhaps count as differences in pre-loaded software rather than anything more fundamental. Certainly reality does not structure itself like a program, but why should it? The analogy is with data, not with the program: you have to think of the brain as a computer which has its software loaded already and is dealing with the data coming down a wire from cameras (eyes), microphones (ears), and so on. I see no problem with that. The argument is a bit more specific than you make out. Edelman points out that the selective processes he has in mind have an unusual feature he calls ‘degeneracy’ (I’m not quite sure why). Degeneracy means that the same output can be reached in a whole range of different ways. This is a feature of the immune system as well as mental processes, but it doesn’t look much like an algorithm. Of course there are other arguments against considering the brain a computer, but I think Edelman’s main point is that to deal with reality, you have to be able to arrange the streams of mixed-up and ever-changing data from the senses into coherent objects. Your computer with a camera attached finds this impossible except in cases where the ‘reality’ has been made artificially simple – a ‘toy world’ – and the computer has been set up in advance with lots of information about how to recognise the objects in the ‘toy world’. I know you’re going to tell me that great strides have been made, and that you only need another couple of decades and it’ll all be sorted. I wasn’t, though it’s true . I was just going to point out again that, however difficult it may be to digest reality, Edelman gives us no definite reasons to think computers couldn’t do it; his robots even demonstrates some aspects of the methods he thinks most likely. But never mind.You expect me to attack Edelman just because he and Searle have spoken favourably of each other: but actually I’ve got nothing much against him except that I think he’s misunderstood the nature of computationalism. Just because we haven’t got USB ports in the back of our heads it doesn’t mean brain activity isn’t computable. As for that bit about ‘degeneracy’, I don’t see it at all. Imagine we had a job we wanted done by computer – we call in a hundred consultants to tender for the project. They’ll find a hundred different ways to do it. Even if we set aside most of the possible variation – whether to use PCs, Macs, Unix boxes or what, Java, C++, visual Basic or whatever. Even if we assume the required outputs are narrowly defined and all the tenderers have to code in bog-standard C, there’ll be thousands of variations. So I reckon computers can be degenerate too… I don’t expect you to attack Edelman at all. As a matter of fact, I’m not an unqualified admirer myself. Take his views on qualia. The temptation for a scientist is always to miss the point about qualia and end up explaining the mechanics of perception instead (a different issue) Edelman, in spite of his scientist bias, is not philosophically naive and a lot of the time he seems to understand the point ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 763 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 745-763 Hankins, P. Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies perfectly. But in ‘A Universe of Consciousness’ he swerves at the last minute and ends up talking about how the neurons could map out a colour space – which might be interesting, but it ain’t qualia. Perhaps his co-author is to blame. However, I’m with him on the computer issue. Edelman’s views about selection illustrate exactly why computers can’t do what the brain does. I think his ideas on this are really important and have possibly been undersold a bit. The thing about programming a computer to deal with real situations is that you have to anticipate every possible kind of problem it might come up against – but there are an infiinite number of different kinds of problem. Now this is exactly the kind of issue the immune system faced: it had to be ready to deal with any molecule whatever, no matter how novel. The solution is analogous: the immune system fills your body with a really vast number of variant antibodies; your brain is full of an astronomical number of different neuronal patterns. When the problem comes along, even a completely novel one, you’re going to have the correct response waiting somewhere: and the one that matches gets reinforced and reused. Edelman called this a Darwinian process: it isn’t really (hence Crick’s joke about it really being ‘neural Edelmanism’): the remarkable thing is, it might be better than Darwinian in this context! Anything’s better than Darwin to you, up to and including spontaneous generation and Divine Creation. Nonsense! But, honestly. It’s not particularly original to suggest that the mind might use selective or Darwinian mechanisms, (or be infected with memes evolved in the memosphere) but normal Darwinian selection is just obviously not the answer. When we confront a sabre-toothed tiger or think what to say to a question in an interview, we don’t start by copying some earlier response, try it out repeatedly and gradually refine it by random mutation. We don’t even do that in our heads, normally. 99% of the time, the response is instant, and appropriate, with nothing random about it at all. It’s a bit easier to understand how this could be so on the Edelman theory, because some reasonably appropriate responses could already be sloshing around in the brain and the best one could be reinforced very quickly. I think you’re going further on that than Edelman himself would be inclined to do. In fact, I’ll give you a prediction. Eventually, Edelman himself will come round to the view that there is nothing unique about all these processes, and that while the brain may not be literally a computer, its processes are computable. I think not. You ought to remember what the man said himself about changes of heart – the unit of selection in successful theory creation is usually a dead scientist… ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

545 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 545-546 Hu, H. & Wu, M. How Self-Relational Consciousness Produces and Interacts with Reality Editorial Note How Self-Relational Consciousness Produces and Interacts with Reality Huping Hu* & Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT In essence, Steven E. Kaufman’s work shows how self-relational Consciousness produces and interacts with reality. But to appreciate the important work done by Kaufman, one needs to read the whole 325 pages of this Focus Issue of JCER covering his work. Our goals with this Focus Issue are: (1) bring broader awareness of Kaufman’s work by scholars and all genuine truth seekers; and (2) promote scholarly discussions of the same through commentaries and responses to commentaries in the future issues of JCER. In so doing, we hope that all of us may benefit in our endeavor to reach higher Consciousness within ourselves and build a genuine Science of Consciousness. Key Words: Consciousness, self-relation, awareness, experience, physical reality, RelationalMatrix Model, Unifed Reality Theoy. Kaufman’s work presented in this Focus Issue is based on his book completed and self-published in 2001 [1]. Our initial intention was inviting Kaufman to write a book summary but changed our mind after Kaufman generously made his book available to us in electronic form and we had a chance to study his book. Kaufman’s work illustrates an ontology in which consciousness accounts for the singular existence and experiential reality extends from this singular existence through the repetitive and progressive self-relation. In other words, according to Kaufman, self-relational consciousness is the basis of experiential reality. In particulars, Kaufman has shown “how existence, by forming relationships with itself repetitively and progressively, evolves into a relational structure that functions as the framework of reality” and developed a fascinating dynamical model called “relational-matrix model.” This model allow Kaufman to account for certain basic aspects of the nature and behavior of physical reality such as temporal relativity, nature of time, the basis of the speed-of-light constant, the basis of Planck’s constant, the nature of gravitation, the equivalence principle, the nature of energy, wave/particle duality and uncertainty principle. The model also provides a conceptual basis for understanding how physical reality extends from the structure of space and why nothing can exist independently. Correspondence: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D., QuantumDream Inc., P. O. Box 267, Stony Brook,, NY 11790. E-mail: editor@jcer.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 546 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 545-546 Hu, H. & Wu, M. How Self-Relational Consciousness Produces and Interacts with Reality This model further allow Kaufman to treat awareness, experience and consciousness as an integral part of reality and explain “why there exists an awareness of physical experience[, w]hy we experience physical reality as we do, as well as why we’re aware or conscious of our experience.” The model even allows him to explain mental and emotional experiences. Thus it can be said that Kaufman’s work is a genuine attempt at a theory of everything which he calls the “Unified Reality Theory.” Indeed, Kaufman has already given us the best summary of his own work [2]: “Unified Reality Theory describes how all reality evolves from an absolute existence. It also demonstrates that this absolute existence must have consciousness as an attribute that's intrinsic to its being. Thus, it shows that consciousness, rather than being a product of the evolution of physical reality, is itself the source of what we experience as physical reality and that physical reality is itself but one aspect of an evolving universal consciousness. Ultimately, Unified Reality Theory uses science and logic to demonstrate that God exists, as a pervasive and absolute consciousness that transcends the realities of space and time, and that we, as well as everything else, are that.” In essence, Steven E. Kaufman’s work shows how self-relational Consciousness produces and interacts with reality. But to appreciate the important work done by Kaufman, one needs to read the whole 325 pages of this Focus Issue of JCER covering his work. Our goals with this Focus Issue are: (1) bring broader awareness of Kaufman’s work by scholars and all genuine truth seekers; and (2) promote scholarly discussions of the same through commentaries and responses to commentaries in the future issues of JCER. In so doing, we hope that all of us may benefit in our endeavor to reach higher Consciousness within ourselves and build a genuine Science of Consciousness. References 1. Steven E. Kaufman (2001), Unified Reality Theory: The Evolution of Existence into Experience. Destiny Toad Press, Milwaukee. 2. Steven E. Kaufman (2011), Unified Reality Theory in a Nutshell, Scientific GOD Journal, V2(3): pp. 200-206. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 132-134 Richardson, D. What Is Consciousness and Where Is It 132 Article What Is Consciousness and Where Is It Dick Richardson* ABSTRACT What is consciousness? It is the mean by which that which I do not know and do not understand makes me aware of it, know it, and come to understand it. And then I can say ‘I KNOW’. Maybe that makes two of us when that is done, maybe not. Find where consciousness begins. THAT is worth finding and knowing. Key Words: consciousness, being, knowing. 1. Introduction Consciousness, like so many other things, is Intangible. That is to say that there is nothing I can point to out there, or even in here, and say there it is, look at it objectively whist standing outside of it. But it is ALL I ever know anything by way of. That is unarguable and self evident. On looking at my body objectively, well, yours actually for I cannot do it with my own, because I in there; inwards, as is the phenomenon of consciousness itself. However, on looking at your body what do I find? I find all manner of bits of stuff which seem to work in harmonious accord (most of the time). And all the bits of stuff in there that I can find are all constructed of the same stuff that one finds in the physical universe itself, out there. It is made of it all – and still evolving, changing, become more than it was (and better in my opinion). I prefer human BEING, than Dinosaur BEING. Not that I ever recall Dinosaur BEING, let alone what it was like being Dinosaur BEING. But I sure would not fancy it. Don’t know what it is like being a tree either, or a woman. Let them each tell me if they can and will what it is like being one of them. Same too with the gods on Mount Olympus let them tell me what it is like being one of them things. 2. On Looking at the Bits One of the most amazing visions to my physical eyes ever (via the tools that can do that) is not the great nebula in which stars are born, amazing though that is, but rather watching a child grow in its mother womb, and looking at each stage of what can be seen that way. It is one of the few visions that ever blew my mind wide apart, and left one gasping in awe and wonder, “Bloody hell, that is incredible”! It is one of the few ultimate WOW’s of all experienced phenomena. I will not go into the other two here. But I have done, in detail, elsewhere. But on looking at you then what do I find in physical terms? Well, forget the beauty bit, for that is there too, and I can see it. But your being and your conscious life and awareness seem to take lace in the brain, or via the brain. That lump of grey stuff twix the ears. Shoot a lump of led into it and you are no longer animated here. A copse, gone the way of the Dodo, and IS no more. Well, no more here at least. So that will save me making coffee for you in the morning, so to speak. And it makes room for others to come here too. Not that I would shoot you for that reason. Although that might be a good idea when one is very old and useless like I am now. But the proof to me of your being here is not that you have a brain (not even sure if you have for that matter, or if you have then if you use it) but by virtue of your animation. You are alive. The thing moves and does things. And when it makes me a cup of coffee then so much the better for it. How does a lump of goo do that? Moreover, what makes it even more profound is when I meet a lump of such goo in a room and the universe does somersaults in my mind, and I become so attached to it. One lump of goo in love Correspondence: Dick Richardson West Somerset, UK E-mail: dick.richardson@ymail.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 132-134 Richardson, D. What Is Consciousness and Where Is It 133 with another lump of goo. But what a lump of goo it is eh. One would die for it. And we do. We live for it and die for it. For the love of a lump of goo? So, is that what your are – a lump of goo? Find out. 3. But What of the Brain and Consciousness? The only way which I can vision anything of the ‘out there world’ is by way of what my brain will allow me to see of it. I see red as read and blue as blue, although I cannot describe either of them to you. For that is impossible to do. Neither, as like some like to say, is there really nothing out there. I know damn well that there is something out there that is not me. But what is it independent of the way which I am give to see it by way of the spectrum of my five eternal senses? It seems to be the case to me that it is ALL out there, and most of which we have never even seen at all, and not in the way that we see it. Thus, as I understand it as yet, we are only seeing bits of it and we are only seeing those bits in the way that our brain can detect them, as yet. But I have also found the five external senses can be honed up and thence see more of it, and clearer. Hence, Latent Sense Development in the Becoming process of BEING in Space and time. Thus I see the brain not as a creator of consciousness (and I never did see it that way) but rather as the limiting process which shuts us down to rest of it, and then open us up to more of it in due course, a bit at a time throughout our personal growth. And the sum of the personal collective growth becomes the consensus of a society. Do you see what I see? This is why I too love taking things apart (including myself) to see what they are made of. But when that is done then I insist on putting it all back together again, back into the finished product of a beautiful world in and amazing physical universe. A tear and a smile in the eye of a rainbow. And me watching it all and even taking part in it all. That is AMAZING and mysterious. How can that be? And who says that it is beautiful and amazing? I DO ! What if you do not see it as beautiful and amazing? Well, try taking another look, or look harder and deeper. But all I could say about that in the final analysis if one does not find it all to be beautiful and amazing, is hard luck. Study your self (the inside) and then you may find that the outside is beautiful and amazing as well. I did. As it is on the inner then so too is it in the outer. And it is all a part of the same thing anyway. Of what? I am not sure. But it sure IS. I look at a stone or a fish, and say to myself, there but for whatever is, goes I. It is really good to be ME. I AM the watcher at the Gates of Dawn and the Traveller on the sea of Space and Time. And very grateful for it. What an amazing adventure. And I care share a part of that journey with you whilst here; whilst time and change lasts for me. It is also very strange yet very true, that no matter how much open finds and how much one comes to understand bits of it, it is still true to say that really, I don’t fully understand anything of it at all. But it is good to be. I understand that well enough. When searching for WHAT IS, and the truth of it, then search everywhere, every thing, and every when. It is the only way to know what is there and what is riding the waves. IT will show you what it is all about. By revealing itself. It is all revelation and the acceptance of it. Let go of that which binds and melt into it all. 4. Conclusion What is consciousness? It is the mean by which that which I do not know and do not understand makes me aware of it, know it, and come to understand it. And then I can say ‘I KNOW’. Maybe that makes two of us when that is done, maybe not. Find where consciousness begins. THAT is worth finding and knowing. In the meantime everybody can tell me what everything is and what it is all about. Yet they have not even found what I have yet found. So I take it with a pinch of salt and smile and walk on. So, let us stick pins in the brain and see if you can find me; and then tell me what it is like being me and being alive, and what I AM, and why. I can do something that Primordial Being cannot do. I can bring it to earth and fulfil it in time and apace, as is done in Essence in Eternity. It cannot do it without me, and that is for sure. It needs me and I need IT. Thou and I together will do what can be done and wherever it can be done. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 132-134 Richardson, D. What Is Consciousness and Where Is It 134 References Richardson, D. The Mystical Gnosis Event (2003). See http://www.psychognosis.net and http://vixra.org/abs/0912.0058. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

779 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 779-781 Smith, S. P. Review of David Skrbina's Book: Panpsychism in the West Book Review Review of David Skrbina's Book: Panpsychism in the West Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT David Skrbina's "Panpsychism in the West" presents the historical emergence of panpsychism within western philosophy: from the ancient Greeks, the Renaissance, the eighteenth century, and up to modern times. Skrbina gives a very comprehensive treatment, worthy of five stars despite my criticism. Nevertheless, I want to point out some subtlety that Skrbina missed, and this is not to detract from Skrbina's fine work. Skrbina writes about my favored panpsychists: C.S. Peirce; A.N. Whitehead, Teilhard de Chardin, and C. Hartshorne. He makes a very impressive case for panpsychism, taking us into modern time. His book is must reading. You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Panpsychism-Bradford-Books-David-Skrbina/dp/0262693518/ref=cm_crmr-title . Key Words: panpsychism, western philosophy, ancient Greek, Renaissance, modern time. First, the word game: It cannot be that we merely define systems into being, say materialism and idealism, leaving the systems identical in all respects except for the select definitions. The definitions by themselves don't automatically present something that is self evident. For example, renaming red into blue, and blue into red, gives us nothing. In the sense that we get hung up on prior definitions (and categories) we are playing only a word game, and getting no closer to the truth. Rather it must be that what we discover with our definitions is only a tension, and it is that somehow the tension is able to resolve itself. Therefore, truth is not defined into being. Truth is discovered as tension resolves itself. Now, the meaning of panpsychism: Correcting for word games that are common to definitions of panpsychism (e.g, as Skrbina provides) gives us the most frugal meaning. In my view, awareness necessarily finds an agreement between an active (will-like) feeling that imprints on a passive (matter-like) substrate, until something self evident is revealed. The slightest feeling holds an awareness. Panpsychism is saying that some awareness exists in animals, plants, (rocks, worlds, and the universe). Because awareness is pervasive, awareness is more generally a property of matter as well as the entire universe. Hence, panpsychism is consistent with a vitalism where both active and passive constituents permeate the universe. An innate feeling takes the provisional into the universal, and revealing what is self evident. Panpsychism finds a middle way between materialism and idealism. Because the validity of panpsychism is itself self evident, materialism and idealism are discovered as bodies of expressions that have not yet reached a sufficient threshold of self awareness, but this realization is getting far ahead. The bottom line is that we can in principle put both materialism and idealism on the psychologist's couch, revise their truth claims and recover evidence for panpsychsim. It is with this revisionist attitude that I read "Panpsychism in the West". This revisionist attitude supports a universal grammar, something already noted by the phenomenologist Edmund Husserl. Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 780 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 779-781 Smith, S. P. Review of David Skrbina's Book: Panpsychism in the West Writing on the mutual interaction of mind and body, Skrbina (page 13) notes how this interaction is plausible: "Only in the naive intuitive argument that `mind clearly exists', `(human) body clearly exists,' and `I know that my mind affects my body and vice versa'. Unfortunately in the 400 years since Descartes no one has produced a satisfactory explanation as to exactly how this would work." This is again more confusion coming from the word game, and Skrbina forgets that Husserl fixed Descartes' view. What comes with self evidence does not require a necessary explanation. Rather it is philosophy that is a derivative of self evidence, and it is a presumed objectivity that questions the mind-body interaction that is found naive. Skrbina (page 21) tells us that a "pantheism can be confused with panpsychism," and that pantheism is a "monistic concept of mind" that is closer "to a traditional theistic view-point". However, if panpsychism wishes to remain viable it must resolve itself with pantheism. Pure pluralistic panpsychism fails because a fragmented plurality forgets that it is only an imprint in something pervasive and immanent. Moreover, it must be possible for the plurality to reach a shared understanding, and this can only be achieved by way of the feeling of empathy. Skrbina (page 9) picked up on the word game, noting that "functionalism [a class of materalistic monism] can be seen to shade into panpsychism." Then he (page 11) fails to note that idealism provides a similar loophole writing that "one can be an idealist without being a panpsychist" and while referring to Hegel as an example. Hegel was a trinitarian more than an idealist, and his system grew out of Schelling's transcendental idealism. Skrbina (page 115) places Schelling close to being a panpsychist, but where Schelling goes so does Hegel. Moreover, how Hegel describes life in the "Science of Logic" can only be seen as an endorsement of vitalism. Vitalism cannot be separated from the meaning of panpsychism, and we find nothing but the word game preventing the recognition of Hegel's panpsychism. Skrbina (pages 58, 60) connects the trinitarian concepts of the Logos and the Holy Spirit to panpsychism, so how he misses this is hard to fathom. Skrbina (page 65) writes: "Monotheism was in direct conflict with panpsychism, and thus it effectively suppressed any advance in panpsychist philosophy. The Christian worldview, along with aspects of Aristotelian natural philosophy, dominated Western intellectual thought for about 1,300 years." However, Skrbina equivocates badly with the word "Christian". "Christian" is not to find its meaning from the most power hungry theologians that gave us the inquisition. The most authoritative theologians do paint a dualistic conception of God that has separated from God's creation, yes this is true. However, it is not the case that Thomas Aquinas (non-panpsychist) is more Christian than Saint Francis of Assisi (panpsychist). What is more important is that when we put Christianity on the couch we find that the mystics are closer to the heart of Christianity, and we find that Jesus was a panpsychist (at least according to trinitarian belief). Skbina makes several references to design arguments being used to justify panpsychism, referring to Patrizi (page 71), Gilbert (page 77), Campanella (page 79), Mauperuis (page 106), and Fechner (page 126). Skrbina (page 188) writes: "Darwin's theory of evolution initiated a series of new scientific arguments for panpsychism." Skrbina forgets the meaning of panpsychism and he misses the fact that Darwin's theory of evolution is opposed to design arguments. However, Darwinism does not escape the couch. Darwinism makes only a caricature of life, attempting to explain what is vital rather than describing something that can only be described. It is that felt vitality is a precondition for natural selection, it is not that natural selection explains the vital; this confusion comes from the word game. Moreover, monads are non-passive so they don't just go along for the ride provided by natural selection thereby making panpsychism redundant. The controversial movement of intelligent design provides the strongest arguments against Darwin's theory, and their evidence is turned into support for panpsychism once these folks are also led to the couch. Skrbina is strangely silent on intelligent design. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 781 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 779-781 Smith, S. P. Review of David Skrbina's Book: Panpsychism in the West Skrbina (page 118) writes: "Schopenhauer thrust the concept of will into a central ontological role. Will, for him, was not merely the equivalent of human desire but was more generally a universal force, a drive, something that impelled all things and sustained all things." Skrbina (page 137) also correctly interprets Nietzsche's "will to power" as an endorsement of panpsychism. Nietzsche embroiled himself in the study of nihilism, not that he himself was a nihilist. Nevertheless, he was easy to associate Christianity with nihilism which led to a confusion that reached its high point with the remark "God is Dead." We find yet another example of the word game. Skrbina writes about my favored panpsychists: C.S. Peirce; A.N. Whitehead, Teilhard de Chardin, and C. Hartshorne. He makes a very impressive case for panpsychism, taking us into modern time. His book is must reading. Nevertheless, a stronger case can be made with the couch. References David Skrbina, 2007, Embracing Mind: The Common Ground of Science and Spirituality, The MIT Press. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

279 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality Article The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality Steven E. Kaufman* ABSTRACT In this article, we will demonstrate that space-time functions as a dynamic relational structure. The relational-matrix model, as a visualizable representation of the structure of space, will be used to explain, among other things, why the physical relationships that Einstein mathematically described exist. Using the relational-matrix model to explain the behavior of physical reality, we will establish a conceptual basis for understanding how physical reality extends from the structure of space. By the end of this article, we will also have established a conceptual basis for understanding why nothing can truly be separated from anything else—i.e., why nothing can be said to exist independent of all other things. Key Words: relational matrix, space-time, dynamical structure, physical reality. I wished to show that space-time isn’t necessarily something to which one can ascribe a separate existence, independently of the actual objects of physical reality. Physical objects are not in space, but these objects are spatially extended. In this way the concept of "empty space” loses its meaning —Albert Einstein, June 9, 1952, Note to the 15th edition of Relativity Einstein’s efforts to uncover a unified field theory were rooted in his belief that the structure of space-time is the key to understanding the characteristics of the electromagnetic and gravitational forces. The World of Physics, vol. III p. 120 Section 1 Introduction Almost 100 years ago, Albert Einstein, in his special and general relativity theories, developed mathematical formulas which told us that matter and energy are equivalent, that space and time are inseparable, that no physical object can travel faster than the speed of light, and that the rate of passage of time for a body in motion is relative to that body's rate of travel through space. In this way, Einstein was able to mathematically demonstrate that these apparently separate aspects of physical reality were all connected. Correspondence: Steven E. Kaufman, http://www.unifiedreality.com E-mail: skaufman@unifiedreality.com Note: This work was completed in 2001 and is based on my book “Unified Reality Theory: The Evolution of Existence into Experience (ISBN-10: 0970655010)” published in the same year. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 280 Einstein understood that all physical phenomena are connected through the spatial structure, existing as extensions of that structure. However, because he was unable to develop a visual model of that structure, he was never able to demonstrate how all these things are connected through that structure. In this article, we will demonstrate that space-time functions as a dynamic relational structure. The relational-matrix model, as a visualizable representation of the structure of space, will be used to explain, among other things, why the physical relationships that Einstein mathematically described exist. Using the relational-matrix model to explain the behavior of physical reality, we will establish a conceptual basis for understanding how physical reality extends from the structure of space. By the end of this article, we will also have established a conceptual basis for understanding why nothing can truly be separated from anything else—i.e., why nothing can be said to exist independent of all other things. Section 2 The “Big Bang” and the Relational Matrix The universe is expanding. This observation, based on astronomical measurements, has led to the theory that the universe began in an outward explosion from some point. In general, the idea of this initial explosion and subsequent expansion of the universe is called the “Big Bang” Theory. The relational-matrix model, as a visualizable representation of space-time, is consistent with the view of an expanding universe that began as a point. We have described the relational-matrix model as the dynamic structure that results when existence repetitively and progressively exists in relation to itself. Yet, there’s another relationship within existence implied by the existence of the relational matrix that we haven’t yet discussed. That implied relationship is between existence that’s existing in relation to itself to form a relational matrix, and existence that isn’t forming a relational matrix. That is, the relational matrix, as an aspect of existence, must itself exist in relation to another aspect of existence that’s not a relational matrix. Putting it still another way, the relational aspect of existence must exist in relation to a complementary nonrelational aspect of existence. The relational matrix, as a structure, represents a constraint, a limitation, that existence has imposed upon itself, upon limitless borderless nonrelative existence. Infinite borderless nonrelative existence can be imagined as a ubiquitous no-thing, as a nonstructure, like a blank sheet of paper extending forever in all directions. The relational matrix, as a structural imposition upon this structural nothingness, can be imagined as a dot (or point) placed somewhere upon that blank sheet of paper. This dot is relative existence as structure existing in relation to nonrelative existence that has no structure. This dot is the relational aspect of existence existing in relation to the nonrelational aspect of existence. In other words, the first relationship that existence forms with itself must be between finite and infinite existence, between relative and nonrelative existence, between existence as relational structure and existence as nonrelational nonstructure, between the finite point and the infinite nonpoint. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 281 Existence exists whether or not the dot is there. However, the dot can’t exist except within the context of existence that’s not a dot—i.e., the dot can’t exist other than as finite bordered relative existence in relation to infinite borderless nonrelative existence. The dot is existence existing in relation to itself. The dot is relative existence, existence that is what it is by virtue of its relationship to a complementary aspect of existence. This is why the dot successively dualizes into a relational matrix, because what the dot is is the relational aspect of existence; what the dot is is existence forming a relationship with itself. Therefore, the dot undergoing a process of successive dualization, of repetitive and progressive self-relation, is not other than relative existence continuing to be what it is—i.e., existence that has formed a relationship with itself. For this reason, existential self-relation, once it has happened, becomes an ongoing process. However, as a relative reality, the dot (i.e., the relational matrix) must do more than internally dualize. As a relative reality, the dot must also penetrate or expand into the nonrelative existence that it exists in relation to. That is, just as the reality cells of the relational matrix maintain their relative existences through the dynamic of continuous interpenetration and interexpansion, the relational matrix as a whole must itself also maintain its relative existence by continuously penetrating and expanding into whatever it is that it exists in relation to, which in this case is infinite borderless nonrelative existence. The universe conceived as expanding from a point of origin owing to a “big bang” represents our view of the dynamic that must be occurring in order for existence to sustain the relationship it has formed with itself. What we observe as the expansion of the universe isn’t other than the ongoing penetration of one aspect of existence into its complementary aspect of existence. What we observe as the expansion of the universe isn’t other than the ongoing penetration and expansion of the relational matrix, as relative existence, into existence that’s nonrelative. In other words, what we observe as the expansion of the universe is one half of the dynamic involved in maintaining the state of relative existence that is the universe. The other half of that dynamic involves the universe as relational matrix, as finite bordered relative existence, being penetrated by whatever it is that it exists in relation to, which, again, in this case is infinite borderless nonrelative existence. That is, as the universe expands into the surrounding nonuniverse, that surrounding nonuniverse must also be expanding into the universe. Putting it another way, as the relational matrix penetrates and expands into existence that is nonrelative, nonrelative existence must also be penetrating and expanding into the relational matrix. It’s these penetrations of the relational matrix by nonrelative existence that create what we have previously defined and described as distortions of the relational matrix. That is, distortions of relational-matrix content originate in areas of the relational matrix that have been penetrated by surrounding existence which isn’t the relational matrix. Distortions are patterns of reality-cell content within the relational matrix that differ from the uniform or baseline pattern and are at some level the opposite of the uniform pattern. The positive/negative polarity or complementarity of reality-cell content arises as the uniform relational matrix is penetrated by existence that’s not the relational matrix. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 282 As we will explained in upcoming sections, what we perceive as the fundamental forms of electromagnetic and gravitational energy are not other than the propagation of these distortions of reality-cell content through the relational matrix, once they’ve come into existence, with that propagation being driven by the dynamic intrinsic to the relational structure of space-time. This situation is somewhat analogous to what happens when the uniformly calm surface of a body of water is penetrated by some object, with the surface of the water in that area becoming then uncalm, or distorted, in relation to the uniformly calm pattern, followed by the propagation of that distortion from its point of origin outward as a water wave. To summarize, what we observe as the expansion of the universe is our perception from within the universe of the process whereby one relative reality or the relational aspect of existence penetrates or expands into its complementary nonrelative reality or the nonrelational aspect of existence. Also, what we experience as propagating distortions—i.e., what we observe as the electromagnetic and gravitational energy of the universe, as well as their material products—is the result of the nonrelative nonuniverse having penetrated the relative universe. Thus, the universe contains infinite form, endless structural variations, because it’s part of a process whereby finite structural existence is expanding into infinite nonstructural existence, while infinite nonstructural existence is also expanding into finite structural existence. The seeming infinity of form observed in the universe is the result of an ongoing dynamic between existence as structure and existence as nonstructure. In this way, the interplay or interrelation between structural constraint and unconstrained possibility creates a universe of infinite form and endless structural variation, wherein no snowflake is identical to another snowflake. This is finite structural existence embodied (i.e., taking shape) within, and in relation to, infinite nonstructural existence. Look at a flower, and what you’re seeing is the marriage of the infinite to the finite, the marriage of existence to itself, as it exists in relation to itself. Look at anything else, or look into a mirror, and you’re observing the same. Section 3 Space-Time and the Relational Matrix Einstein’s relativity theory demonstrated the inseparability of spatial and temporal existence by revealing that the rate of passage of time which an object is observed to experience varies with object’s rate of travel through space. This connection between the passage of time and material velocity established the idea that space and time are the dual aspects of a single underlying reality, which is now referred to as space-time. The structural and dynamic aspects of the relational-matrix model also have been described as the dual aspects of a single underlying reality. We will show that space and time are inseparably linked because they’re the manifestations of the structural and dynamic aspects, respectively, of the dynamic relational structure that underlies our perception of the universe, as depicted in figure 31. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 283 Figure 31 Diagrammatic representation of the dynamic structure we perceive as spacetime. “Space” is derived from the static aspect of the spatial structure, wherein areas of existence are defined in relation to each other as reality cells of a certain size or volumetric existence (VE). The “time” aspect is derived from the dynamic aspect of the spatial structure, which involves the continuous exchange of spatial content between reality cells. In the relational-matrix model, space is the manifestation of the structural aspect of the relational matrix, i.e., the volumetric existence (VE) of the reality cells. A reality cell defines a spatial construct, an area of relational structure within existence. The area so defined exists as spatial content, as an area of space. Space doesn’t exist “within” the reality cell; space is the reality cell, and the structure of space is derived from the relationships between reality cells. As we will describe in upcoming sections, there’s no empty space for things to be “in”; there’s only the dynamic structure of space, which, as existence repetitively and progressively existing in relation to itself, composes the energy, the matter, and then the experience of those things as existing “in” space. Time, then, is the manifestation of the dynamic aspect of the relational matrix. Essentially, time will be shown to be nothing more than a measure of the cyclic or periodic activity of compound distortion processes or matter. Since time doesn’t exist until there exists matter, we can’t explain how the dynamic aspect of the relational matrix relates to time until we have first shown how matter arises within the context of the unified model of reality. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 284 To demonstrate that space-time functions as a dynamic structure, and to eventually show how matter arises within the context of that dynamic structure, we will now relate reality-cell distortions and distortion propagation to some fundamental aspects of electromagnetic radiation and gravitation. Section 4 Electromagnetic Radiation and the Relational Matrix In this section, we will define the existence of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) within the context of the relational-matrix model.1 We will demonstrate that the propagation of electromagnetic radiation through space is represented in the relational-matrix model by linearly propagating distortions that have a distortion content equivalent to the maximal distortion. In other words, electromagnetic radiation will be shown to represent the linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex. Modeling electromagnetic radiation within the context of the relational matrix will reveal the basis of some of its fundamental properties. An individual electromagnetic wavicle,2 or photon, is defined by its frequency, wavelength, and energy, all of which are related through physical constants. Wavelength ( ) and frequency ( ) are inversely related through the speed-of-light constant (c); this is stated as = c. The frequency ( ) of an individual electromagnetic wavicle is directly related to its energy (E) through Planck’s constant (h), also known as the quantum of action, as stated in the equation E = h . The relationship between wavelength, frequency, and the speed of light is depicted in figure 32. wavelength x frequency = the speed-of-light constant frequency radio waves microwaves infrared wavelength visible light ultraviolet X-rays gamma rays the speed-of-light constant 186,272 mi/s Figure 32 The relationship between the wavelength, frequency, and velocity of electromagnetic radiation. The shorter the wavelength, the higher the frequency. In a vacuum, all electromagnetic radiation, regardless of its wavelength and frequency, 1 Visible light is electromagnetic radiation, but it represents only a small part of the electromagnetic spectrum. X-rays, ultraviolet rays, and infrared rays are also part of that spectrum. 2 The term “wavicle” is used here to denote the dual nature of electromagnetic radiation, as it exhibits both particle and wave characteristics. The source of this dual wave and particle nature is examined and explained in article 4 of this work. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 285 propagates at the same velocity of approximately 186,272 mi/s, (300,000 km/s). This invariant velocity is the speed-of-light constant (c). In this diagram, three different electromagnetic wavicles are depicted, representing, from largest to smallest wavelength, the primary colors, red, green, and blue, for which we have specific sensory receptors. However, visible light makes up only a very small part of the electromagnetic spectrum, which extends from waves of extremely high frequency and short wavelength to waves of extremely low frequency and long wavelength. In the next few subsections, we will demonstrate that electromagnetic wavelength and frequency are manifestations of the structural and dynamic aspects of reality cells—i.e., the volumetric existence (VE) and the period of content exchange (POCE), respectively. We will also demonstrate how the energy associated with an electromagnetic wavicle is related to the distortion content of a reality cell. Finally, we will demonstrate that the speed-of-light constant and Planck’s constant are both manifestations of constant relationships which exist within the dynamic structure that is space-time. 4.1 Wavelength, frequency, the speed of light, and the relational matrix Previously, we defined the complementary structural and dynamic aspects of reality cells in terms of their volumetric existence (VE) and period of content exchange (POCE), respectively. Within space-time, electromagnetic radiation also has complementary structural and dynamic aspects that define its existence. These complementary structural and dynamic aspects of electromagnetic radiation are wavelength and frequency, respectively. In terms of reality cells, the VE and POCE are inversely related through the rate-of-penetration constant (kRP). In terms of electromagnetic radiation, the wavelength and frequency are inversely related through the speed-of-light constant (c). The rate of propagation of a distortion of reality-cell content is equivalent to the kRP, which is defined as the VE multiplied by the POCE—i.e., VE x POCE = kRP. Similarly, the linear velocity of electromagnetic radiation is equivalent to the speed-of-light constant (c), which is defined as the wavelength multiplied by the frequency—i.e., = c. Thus, the relationships between the complementary structural and dynamic aspects of electromagnetic radiation exactly parallel the relationships between the complementary structural and dynamic aspects of reality cells. These parallels allow us to begin to define electromagnetic radiation within the context of the relational-matrix model as a linearly propagating distortion of reality-cell content. Within the context of the relational-matrix model, electromagnetic wavelength is equivalent to reality-cell VE, electromagnetic frequency is equivalent to reality-cell POCE, and the speed-oflight constant is equivalent to the kRP and the constant rate of distortion propagation. The parallels between these different aspects of electromagnetic radiation and linearly propagating distortions of reality-cell content are depicted in figure 33. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality linearly propagating distortion of reality-cell content = 286 propagating electromagnetic radiation VE x POCE = constant rate of distortion propagation wavelength x frequency = the speed-of-light constant Figure 33 The relationship between the basic aspects of distortion propagation and electromagnetic radiation (EMR). (Left) Four different linearly propagating distortions of different sizes or VEs. (Right) Four different wavelengths of EMR. The reality-cell VE is analogous to EMR wavelength, the reality-cell POCE is analogous to EMR frequency, and the constant rate of distortion propagation is analogous to the speed-oflight constant. Also, as discussed in the next subsection, the discrete relationship between reality cells at different relational levels of reality, depicted here as four different sizes of propagating distortions, is what’s responsible for the quantum nature of EMR. Having defined electromagnetic radiation within the context of the relational-matrix model, we will now relate other aspects of electromagnetic radiation to that model. In so doing, we will provide further evidence that space-time functions as a dynamic structure, and that what we experience as physical reality exists as an extension of that dynamic structure. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 287 4.2 The quantum nature of electromagnetic radiation quan·tum (kwòn¹tem) noun plural quan·ta (-te) 1. A quantity or an amount. 2. A specified portion. 3. Something that can be counted or measured. 4. Physics. a. The smallest amount of a physical quantity that can exist independently, especially a discrete quantity of electromagnetic radiation. b. This amount of energy regarded as a unit.3 The concept of electromagnetic quanta refers to the fact that the energy associated with electromagnetic radiation exists in discrete quantities, rather than in a continuous gradation. That is, although there’s an electromagnetic spectrum or continuum, that continuum isn’t continuous! Rather, the electromagnetic spectrum is divided into specific and discrete energy quantities. The reality cells of the relational matrix also have a discrete or quantum nature. The reality cells don’t occur in a continuous gradient but in discrete sizes. Because each reality cell exists as a result of the dualization of a larger reality cell, this relationship creates “quantum jumps” between one reality-cell size and the next smaller or larger reality-cell size. Thus, each relational level of reality within the relational matrix is made up of reality cells that all have the same specific and discrete VE and POCE—i.e., they all have the same discrete structural and dynamic parameters. Having related electromagnetic wavelength to reality-cell VE, and electromagnetic frequency to reality-cell POCE, we can now state that the discrete quantum levels of electromagnetic radiation each correspond to a certain relational level of reality within the relational matrix wherein all the reality cells have the same discrete structural and dynamic parameters. In other words, the discrete nature of reality-cell existence is what forms the basis of the quantum nature of electromagnetic radiation. This discrete nature of reality-cell existence is depicted in figures 15, 22, and 33. We can now use this understanding of the existence of electromagnetic frequency, wavelength, and quanta, as they’ve been defined within the context of the relational-matrix model, to examine and understand the existence and basis of the energy itself that is, and is associated with, electromagnetic radiation. To do this, we will need to revisit the concept of distortion content and the special case of distortion content that represents a maximal distortion. 4.3 Energy and the relational matrix In this subsection, we will relate the concept of energy, as it applies to the quantity of energy associated with electromagnetic radiation, to the relational-matrix model. Specifically, we will 3 The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition, copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Co. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 288 approach the concept of energy through the well-known relationship of electromagnetic energy (E) to frequency ( ) and Planck’s constant (h) as stated in the equation E = h . We have already related electromagnetic frequency to reality-cell POCE, and so we can begin by substituting POCE for frequency in the equation E = h as E = h x POCE. However, to understand the nature of energy within the context of the relational-matrix model, we must also define Planck’s constant within the context of this model, so that we can then solve for E in the equation E = h wholly within the context of the model. In the following subsection, we will show that Planck’s constant is the manifestation of a relationship intrinsic to reality cells which remains constant at all levels of scale. Understanding the basis of Planck’s constant within the context of the relational-matrix model will allow us to understand what it is that makes energy energetic. 4.31 Electromagnetic radiation, Planck’s constant, and the relational matrix Electromagnetic wavicles or photons each are associated with a certain quantity of energy, and propagating distortions each are associated with a certain pattern of distortion content. So, there’s a parallel between the distortion content of a propagating distortion and the energy of an electromagnetic wavicle, inasmuch as they both represent what is delivered by their respective realities. We can then postulate that energy is equivalent to distortion content, as depicted in figure 34. The nature of this equivalence is what we will explore next. linearly propagating distortion variation of distortion content EMR energy Figure 34 The energy associated with an electromagnetic wavicle is equivalent to the distortion content associated with a propagating distortion. Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) represents a certain quantity of energy, whereas a propagating distortion represents a certain pattern of distortion content. Since electromagnetic radiation has been modeled as a linearly propagating distortion, the energy associated with an electromagnetic wavicle is then analogous to the pattern of distortion content associated with a propagating distortion. For a particular electromagnetic wavicle, the quantity of energy is constant, as stated in the equation E = h . That is, the quantity of energy associated with an electromagnetic wavicle doesn’t increase or decrease as it propagates. We also know that in a vacuum, and in the absence ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 289 of a gravitational field, an electromagnetic wavicle propagates in a straight line. We will use these properties to further define electromagnetic radiation within the context of the relationalmatrix model as a specific type of propagating distortion. Since electromagnetic energy is equivalent to distortion content, and the quantity of energy associated with a particular electromagnetic wavicle is constant, then electromagnetic radiation modeled as a propagating distortion should be represented by a reality-cell distortion that propagates through the relational matrix with a constant pattern of distortion content. In Article 2, where we developed the relational-matrix model, we described the scenario of a linearly propagating distortion with a constant pattern of distortion content.4 In that scenario, the constant pattern of distortion content is that of the maximal distortion. Using the parallelism between wavelength and VE, frequency and POCE, and the speed-of-light constant and the constant rate of distortion propagation, we have already defined electromagnetic radiation within the context of the relational-matrix model as a linearly propagating distortion. Now, using the parallelism between constant electromagnetic energy and constant pattern of distortion content, we will further define electromagnetic radiation within the context of the relational-matrix model as the linear propagation of a maximal distortion. As described in Article 2, a linearly propagating maximal distortion is one component of a linear-radial distortion complex.5 Therefore, we will define electromagnetic radiation as the linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex, as depicted in figure 35. Figure 35 (Left) A linear-radial distortion complex. (Right) An electromagnetic wavicle. Within the context of the relational-matrix model, electromagnetic radiation is analogous to the linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex. As explained earlier, the pattern of distortion content represented by the linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex is that of a maximal distortion. 4 5 See article 2, subsection 7.2. See article 2, subsection 7.3. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 290 Distortions of the relational matrix consist of patterns of reality-cell content distribution that differ from a content pattern that is defined as uniform. Maximal distortions all have the same pattern of reality-cell content distribution, regardless of reality-cell size, or VE, because the content pattern that represents the maximal distortion is the opposite of the uniform pattern. Thus, the pattern of reality-cell content distribution must be the same for all maximal distortions. The relationship between any two quantities can be expressed as a ratio, which is one quantity divided by the other. Thus, any pattern of distortion content could be expressed as a positive/negative or negative/positive ratio, which we can call the distortion ratio (DR). Since the maximal distortion represents a constant and consistent pattern of distortion content—i.e., a constant and consistent pattern of reality-cell content distribution—its distortion ratio would be invariant, or a constant, regardless of the size of the maximal distortion—i.e., regardless of the VE of the maximally distorted reality cell. The distortion-ratio constant associated with maximal distortions will be denoted as kDR. The relative quantification of the distortion ratio is depicted in figure 36. Distortion ratio (DR) Uniformity Nonmaximal distortion Maximal distortion 0 no distortion > 0, < kDR constant DR increasing distortion content kDR Figure 36 The distortion ratio (DR) is the positive/negative, or negative/positive content ratio of reality-cell content that exists for distortions—i.e., the nonuniform pattern of reality-cell-content distribution. Uniformity, being a state of nondistortion, has a distortion ratio defined as zero. The maximal distortion has the greatest distortion ratio, which is the distortion-ratio constant (kDR), and all intermediate degrees of distortion have a distortion ratio between zero and kDR. As stated previously, the quantity of energy associated with an electromagnetic wavicle is equivalent to the distortion content of a linearly propagating maximal distortion. The distortion content of a linearly propagating maximal distortion can be expressed as a constant positive/negative or negative/positive ratio of reality-cell content called the distortion-ratio constant. Therefore, the quantity of energy associated with electromagnetic radiation is related to the distortion-ratio constant (kDR). However, the quantity of energy associated with electromagnetic radiation isn’t precisely equivalent to the distortion content of a linearly propagating maximal distortion, or else the energy associated with all electromagnetic wavicles would be identical, since the distortion content or distortion ratio of all linearly propagating maximal distortions is the same. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 291 What a linearly propagating maximal distortion delivers is a constant and consistent pattern of distortion content, represented by the kDR. Reality cells existing at different relational levels of reality deliver those constant and consistent patterns of distortion content in different sizes (i.e., with different VEs), and at different frequencies (i.e., at different POCEs). We know from the equation E = h that energy is directly related to variable electromagnetic frequency through Planck’s constant. Therefore, within the context of the relational-matrix model, the “energy” associated with a linearly propagating maximal distortion is related to the reality-cell POCE through a constant analogous to Planck’s constant (h), expressed as E = (constant)POCE. The question is, what constant in the relational-matrix model represents Planck’s constant? In the preceding paragraphs, we developed a constant, kDR, that represents the constant and consistent pattern of distortion content propagated by the linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex. Planck’s constant, according to the equation E = h , represents an invariant quantity of action associated with electromagnetic radiation. As the frequency of electromagnetic radiation increases, its energy, equivalent to Planck’s constant times the frequency, also increases, and so the energy for a higher frequency of electromagnetic radiation is greater than for a lower frequency of electromagnetic radiation. What a propagating distortion does is change the pattern of reality-cell content in an area of the relational matrix. This is the specific action performed by a propagating distortion. For linearly propagating maximal distortions, this action is always the same, since the degree of distortion is always maximal. Whereas the area of that action, and its frequency, vary according to the inverse relationship between reality-cell VE and POCE, the action itself, that of maximal distortion, is invariant. Thus, there’s a parallel between Planck’s constant, as an invariant quantity of action intrinsic to electromagnetic radiation, and the distortion-ratio constant (kDR), as the invariant action intrinsic to linearly propagating maximal distortions. Therefore, within the context of the relationalmatrix model, Planck’s constant is equivalent to the distortion-ratio constant, as depicted in figure 37.6 6 By equating Planck’s constant to the kDR, Planck’s constant can be seen as the manifestation of a relationship that’s intrinsic to reality cells, one that remains constant regardless of scale. This situation is similar to the basis of the constant , which represents the relationship of a circle to itself, which intrinsic relationship also remains the same regardless of scale. In the case of both the speed-of-light constant and Planck’s constant, we have now demonstrated that these physical constants represent invariant relationships which are intrinsic to the relational matrix, i.e., invariant relationships which are intrinsic to the dynamic structure of space. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality E=fxh E = POCE x DR-k or Energy = frequency x or Energy = period of content exchange x 292 Plank's constant distortion ratio constant Figure 37 The parallel between Planck’s constant and the distortion-ratio constant. Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) has been modeled as a linearly propagating maximal distortion. The maximal distortion content that’s propagated has been relatively quantified as the distortion-ratio constant (kDR). Whereas Planck’s constant (h) represents an invariant quantity of action associated with EMR, the kDR represents an invariant action intrinsic to linearly propagating maximal distortions. Therefore, Planck’s constant is equivalent to the distortion-ratio constant. (Left) Propagating distortions. (Right) Electromagnetic wavicles, modeled as all carrying the same pattern of maximal content distortion represented by kDR. What both linearly propagating maximal distortions and electromagnetic wavicles deliver is a constant degree of spatial-content distortion. The frequency (POCE) of that distortion content is the variable that determines the quantity of energy associated with a particular wavelength of EMR. Substituting kDR for Planck’s constant, we can now solve for electromagnetic energy in terms of the relational-matrix model. The equation E = h can be stated as E = kDR x POCE. What this shows is that, within the context of the relational-matrix model, the energy associated with electromagnetic radiation is equivalent to the frequency of maximal distortion. So, energy is related to distortion content, although energy doesn’t exist directly as distortion content. That is, energy, in terms of the relational-matrix model, is directly related to both the frequency of distortion and the degree of distortion. The greater the frequency (POCE), with the distortion ratio held constant, the greater the energy. Conversely, the greater the distortion ratio, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 293 with frequency held constant, the greater the energy. Lesser degrees of distortion, creating smaller distortion ratios, with frequency held constant, would correspond to less energy. That is, for submaximal distortions, according to the equation E = kDR x POCE, the smaller the distortion ratio, the less the energy associated with that distortion. Although intuitively it may seem that greater energy should be associated with a larger area of distortion (i.e., greater VE or wavelength), this isn’t the case. As stated in the equation E = h , or E = kDR x POCE, it seems that what’s important in terms of the quantity of energy is not how large is the area of space with a distorted content, but how distorted is the area in question, along with the frequency with which that distortion occurs. Ultimately, the point of relating Planck’s constant to the distortion-ratio constant was to show that, according to the equation E = h , energy is fundamentally nothing more than a propagating distortion of spatial content. How the concept of energy as a propagating distortion is analogous to the concept of an energy field will be discussed in the next subsection. 4.4 Energy as distortion field Because the reality of space-time consists fundamentally of existence existing in relation to itself, nothing is what it is intrinsic to itself. Rather, all things are what they are only in relation to the complementary thing that they’re not. Thus, hot exists in relation to cold, up in relation to down, good in relation to bad, distortion in relation to uniformity, and energy in relation to nonenergy. The only thing that is what it is, as it is, is absolute existence, which isn’t a “thing” at all. What is energy? Energy is fundamentally a distortion of reality-cell content propagating through the relational matrix. Even though we have defined propagating distortions as energy, it should be understood that energy doesn’t exist as such except in relation to nonenergy—i.e., distortions exist as such only in relation to uniformity. There are no independently existent energy processes or distortions. The existence of any reality is derived from the relationship to its complementary reality. Thus, what energy is can be understood only in the context of its relationship to what it’s not. That energy is inseparable from what isn’t energy can be understood by looking at energy as a field. What is a field? It’s one area of space that is distinguishable from another area of space in terms of its content or appearance. A field of wheat is distinguished from a field of corn by what grows in them. Were all spatial content the same, no area of space would be distinguishable from any other, and there would be no field, no energy, only uniformity. So, a field is defined as such according to what it is in relation to what it’s not. Likewise, energy is discernible as energy only in contrast to what isn’t energy. An energy field exists as such only in relation to other areas of space that aren’t energy fields. In terms of the relational matrix, areas of reality-cell distortion within the relational matrix exist as such only in relation to areas of reality-cell uniformity. The relationship between fields, distortions, and energy is depicted in figure 38. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 294 Figure 38 Depicted in the boxes at the top are fields, i.e., areas that differ from the surrounding area in terms of their content pattern. Depicted in the boxes at the bottom are distortions, which are also areas that differ from the surrounding area in terms of their content pattern. The boxes on the left show the state of uniformity, the boxes in the middle show an intermediate variation of the uniform pattern, and the boxes on the right show a maximal variation of the uniform pattern. We have described energy as a field because we have recognized that energy represents some variation of content pattern within the spatial structure. Propagating distortions are equivalent to energy. Energy isn’t something other than space; rather, energy is a propagating pattern of spatial content that differs from the baseline or uniform pattern of spatial content. Energy doesn’t exist “in” space, as if it were somehow separately existent from space. Energy is space, but it’s space that’s deviated or distorted, dualized or polarized, from its original state.7 Energy is a spatial “field,” an area of space that’s distinguishable from other areas of space because of a difference in its content pattern. Just as a water wave is still water, it’s also an area of water that’s distinguishable from other areas of water because of a different pattern of existence in that area. Energy thus represents a moving spatial field, or a propagating distortion of spatial content. A distortion is energetic both because it exists in contrast to its opposite and because it propagates. This characteristic property of energy derives both from the relative distortion of spatial content and from the fact that the distortion content is moving from place to place. 7 The pattern of space-time content becomes deviated from its original or uniform state because space-time is itself being penetrated by the existence that it, as universe, is expanding into or penetrating (see article 3, section 2). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 295 For many years, physicists have sought a unified-field theory, a way to explain all energies as variations or extensions of a single underlying field or structure. The relational-matrix model represents a nonmathematical unified-field theory. In this model, the uniform pattern of spatial content of the dynamic structure of space is itself the underlying unified field from which different types of energy extend as variations of that content pattern. Specifically, variations of the uniform pattern of spatial content exist as propagating patterns of distortion content, or moving spatial fields, that form the basis of what we observe as energy. In this model, different patterns of distortion propagation represent different types of energy. So far, we have related one type of energy, electromagnetic radiation, to one type of propagating distortion, the linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex. In the next section, we will relate the gravitational field or force to the radial component of the linear-radial distortion complex. We will then be in a position to describe the nature of matter and its relationship to, and inseparability from, the dynamic structure of space. Once we have described the relationship between the structure of matter and the structure of space, we will go on to describe the nature of time and its relationship to the dynamic aspect of the spatial structure. Conceptual checkpoint I-6 -The inseparability of space and time is a manifestation of the relativity and mutual coexistence of the structural and dynamic aspects of the spatial structure. -Electromagnetic radiation is analogous to the linear propagation of a maximal reality-cell distortion. Specifically, electromagnetic radiation represents the linear component of the linearradial distortion complex. -Electromagnetic wavelength is analogous to reality-cell VE. -Electromagnetic frequency is analogous to reality-cell POCE. -The speed-of-light constant is a manifestation of the rate-of-penetration constant, which creates the constant rate of distortion propagation. -Planck’s constant is analogous to the distortion-ratio constant (kDR), which is equivalent for all maximal distortions. -The quantity of energy associated with each electromagnetic wavicle is, in terms of the relational-matrix model, a function and measure of the frequency of maximal distortion occurring in any area of the relational matrix, expressed as E = kDR x POCE. -Energy is fundamentally a propagating distortion of spatial content. Energy as a field is analogous to a distortion of spatial content existing in contrast to the uniform pattern of spatial content. -The dynamic structure of space, along with its uniform pattern of spatial content, is itself the unified field from which energy extends as a variation, or distortion, of that uniform pattern. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 296 -Different patterns of distortion propagation represent different types of energy. Section 5 The Complementarity of Electromagnetic Radiation and Gravitation In this section, we will define gravitation within the context of the relational-matrix model. Essentially, we will demonstrate that electromagnetic radiation and gravitation represent the complementary patterns of distortion propagation intrinsic to the linear-radial distortion complex. The linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex has already been accounted for through our description of electromagnetic radiation as representing a linearly propagating maximal distortion. In this section, we will relate gravitation to the radial component of the linear-radial distortion complex. However, we will first develop a chain of logic to provide a basis for this proposed association between electromagnetic radiation and gravitation. 5.1 Matter as associations of electromagnetic radiation According to Einstein’s relativity theory, matter is made up of the accumulation, association, or interaction of the stuff we call energy. We can relate matter to electromagnetic radiation through the concept of energy. If matter is equivalent to energy, through the equation E = mc2, and electromagnetic radiation is a type of energy, through E = h , then the energy of matter may be the same as the energy of electromagnetic radiation. As an example, consider the Sun or any other star. Stars are thought to form as accumulations of hydrogen, the simplest atom. Once the density of hydrogen is sufficient, the hydrogen atoms begin to undergo nuclear fusion, combining to form atoms of heavier elements, with substantial amounts of energy (in the form of electromagnetic radiation) being released as the byproduct of these atomic recombinations. Thus, as the matter of which the Sun is composed undergoes fusion, what is released is electromagnetic radiation, part of which we see as the radiant light of the Sun. Therefore, it’s probable that the hydrogen-matter of which a star is composed is itself composed of accumulations of electromagnetic radiation and that the process of nuclear fusion involves the release of some of that electromagnetic radiation from its previously stable interaction as hydrogen atoms. For example, let’s say we have two small wooden chairs, and we want to make a single larger chair. In combining the two chairs we end up with a couple of left over pieces of wood that aren’t needed to compose the structure of the new, larger chair. So we toss them aside. This is what the stars are doing in nuclear fusion. When hydrogen atoms combine to form a heavier atom, some of the constituent pieces that make up the hydrogen atoms aren’t needed to compose the structure of the single heavier atom, and so they’re tossed aside or released. What’s released from stars through nuclear fusion is electromagnetic radiation, part of which we perceive as visible light. Therefore, it’s not unreasonable to postulate that hydrogen atoms are composed, at least in part, of constituent pieces in the form of electromagnetic radiation. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 297 Therefore, the chain of logic linking electromagnetic radiation to gravitation begins by postulating that matter is, at least in part, focal accumulations of interacting or structurally associated electromagnetic wavicles. Putting it another way, when two or more electromagnetic wavicles form a stable association, that association exists as matter. Just how electromagnetic wavicles interact to form such stable associations will be explained in an upcoming section. 5.2 The EMR-gravitation complex It’s commonly thought that the existence of matter somehow creates or causes the existence of a gravitational field around itself. That is, matter is seen as a primary cause, and gravitation is seen as a secondary effect that the presence of matter has upon the structure of space-time. That we see matter as primary and gravitation as secondary is no doubt influenced by our perspective, inasmuch as we tend to see ourselves as material beings and so tend to see matter as primary or central. However, since gravitation and matter are always found in association, it’s probable that whatever exists as gravitation is as vital to the existence of matter as matter is to the existence of gravitation. That is, it’s probable that without gravitation there’d be no matter. One doesn’t exist without the other in our experience. Thus, when we speak of either matter or gravitation, we’re really speaking of a matter-gravitation complex. If matter is composed of stable associations of electromagnetic radiation, as we have postulated, then the matter-gravitation complex can be considered to be more fundamentally an EMRgravitation complex. That is, electromagnetic radiation and gravitation aren’t two separate fields or forces; rather, they’re in some way complementary and, thus, mutually coexistent energy fields. The next step will be to define the existence of the EMR-gravitation complex within the context of the relational-matrix model in terms of the linear-radial distortion complex, thereby demonstrating the source of the complementarity of electromagnetic radiation and gravitation. We will then be in a position to relate the existence and properties of matter to the relationalmatrix model. 5.3 Relating the EMR-gravitation complex to the relational-matrix model Within the context of the relational-matrix model, the EMR-gravitation complex is analogous to the linear-radial distortion complex. More specifically, gravitation is represented in the relational-matrix model by the radial component of the linear-radial distortion complex. That is, gravitation is a radially propagating submaximal distortion that coexists with a linearly propagating maximal distortion, which we have previously related to electromagnetic radiation, as depicted in figure 39. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality c b a a b 298 c Figure 39 A lateral view (left) and cross sections (a, b, and c on right) of a linear-radial distortion complex, or an EMR-gravitation complex. The linear component is analogous to electromagnetic radiation, and the radial component is analogous to gravitation. The linearly propagating electromagnetic component (black areas) outwardly radiates a gravitational distortion (gray areas), while the radially propagating gravitational component also inwardly radiates an electromagnetic distortion, which electromagnetic distortion then outwardly radiates a gravitation distortion and so on. Which came first, the chicken or the egg, the linear component or the radial component? Neither, for they’re complementary or opposite aspects of what’s actually a single process. The radially propagating gravitational component has some qualities that are the same as, and some qualities that are different from, the linearly propagating electromagnetic component. Because the radial component is a propagating distortion, it propagates at the same rate as do all distortions, i.e., at the rate-of-penetration constant, which we have shown to represent the speedof-light constant. Therefore, the rate of propagation of the radial component (i.e., the gravitational distortion) is the same as the rate of propagation of the linear component (i.e., the electromagnetic distortion) with both occurring at the speed of light. This result is consistent with Einstein's theory of gravitation, wherein accelerated masses produce signals (gravitational waves) that travel at the speed of light.8 8 Owing to the relative weakness of the gravitational force in relation to the electromagnetic force, such waves have yet to be indisputably detected. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 299 Because the gravitational distortion propagates radially from its point or axis of origin, the distortion content or distortion ratio decreases the farther the gravitational distortion propagates from its point or axis of origin.9 In this way, the radially propagating gravitational component differs from the linearly propagating electromagnetic component, inasmuch as the linear component (i.e., electromagnetic radiation) maintains a constant level of maximal distortion as it propagates. Since the distortion content, quantified as a distortion ratio, is related to the energy level of the distortion field in question, saying that the distortion content of the radial component decreases as it propagates away from the point or axis of origin is the same as saying that the gravitational field or force diminishes the farther it propagates from its point or axis of origin. Thus, within the context of the relational-matrix model, the basis for the diminishment of gravitational field or force that occurs with increasing distance from matter or mass can be understood as a manifestation of the decrease in distortion content that occurs as the result of radial distortion propagation. That is, gravitational force diminishes with distance from matter because it’s a radially propagating distortion, whose distortion content decreases, becomes diluted or lessened, becoming more like the uniform content pattern, the farther the distortion gets from its point or axis of origin. This diminishment of gravitational field or force occurs unless the gravitational distortion combines with another gravitational field, in which case the gravitational distortion increases in the area of overlap.10 Next, we will examine how EMR-gravitation complexes interact to form matter. We will show the EMR-gravitation complex to be the primary unit composing matter. For that reason, and to facilitate the discussion of how EMR-gravitation complexes interact to form matter, we will now define a single EMR-gravitation complex as a primary distortion process. Conceptual checkpoint I-7 -Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and gravitation are complementary and exist as an EMRgravitation complex. -The EMR-gravitation complex is analogous to the linear-radial distortion complex. -Electromagnetic radiation corresponds to the linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex, and gravitation corresponds to the radial component of the linear-radial distortion complex. -Gravitation is always associated with matter because matter is composed of stable interactions or associations between EMR-gravitation complexes. -A single EMR-gravitation complex will be referred to as a primary distortion process. 9 See article 2, subsection 7.21. See article 2, subsection 7.22, figure 27. 10 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 300 Section 6 Primary-Distortion-Process Interaction (The Dynamic Structure of Matter) In the discussion that follows, we will describe how matter is composed of interacting of primary distortion processes (i.e., EMR-gravitation complexes). First, we will explore the reason why primary distortion processes are able to form stable interactions. Second, we will describe the structure of the compound distortion processes (i.e., matter) formed by those stable interactions. Once the structure of matter and its relationship to the structure of space-time have been described, we will then be in a position to examine and understand the basis of some fundamental properties of matter, such as momentum, inertia, and the relativity of time and mass. 6.1 The pattern of primary-distortion-process interaction that forms matter In order for primary distortion processes to interact so as to form matter, they must form stable associations. The basic pattern those stable associations take is that of a twist or spiral. That is, the interaction occurs as the linearly propagating electromagnetic components repetitively circle or orbit around one another, resulting in a twisting or spiraling pattern of interaction, similar to twisting two strands of rope together. Thus, in the interaction of primary distortion processes, a change occurs from linear propagation to relatively nonlinear (i.e., circular or twisting) propagation of the electromagnetic component. Since these patterns of interaction are composed of individual propagating distortions, any interaction between primary distortion processes must occur along paths of distortion propagation that are allowed by the structure of the relational matrix, i.e., by the spatial structure. In this way, the structure of space-time limits, constrains, and determines the structure of matter. This twisting pattern of primary-distortion-process interaction is allowed by the cubicclosepacking structure of space-time, and is depicted in figure 40. end view lateral view end view top view two-dimensional representation of three-dimensional twisting pattern of interaction bottom view Figure 40 (Left) Different views of a three-dimensional representation of the twisting pattern of interaction of the electromagnetic components of two primary distortion processes. (Right) How that twisting pattern of interaction will be represented in two ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 301 dimensions. It’s this twisting pattern of primary-distortion-process interaction that forms what we observe as matter. In the diagrams on the left, the relatively nonlinear propagation of two different electromagnetic components is depicted with two different shades of stippling. (The gravitational component is not pictured.) The white areas are the areas of “space” between the electromagnetic components, which would be occupied by the gravitational distortion associated with each of those electromagnetic components. In the diagram on the right, the relatively nonlinear propagation of two different electromagnetic components is depicted. This pattern of primary-distortion-process interaction represents the basic structure of matter and also represents the third level of existential self-relation, or the third way in which existence can form a relationship with itself, as depicted in figure 2. This new level of existential self-relation both requires, and is limited by, the dynamic structure of the two prior levels of existential selfrelation, i.e., the dynamic structure of space-time and the dynamic structure of energy. Once we see how matter exists as an extension of the spatial structure, we can begin to establish a basis for understanding and explaining how the behavior and characteristics of matter are linked to this structure. For, as we shall see, it’s this unbreakable linkage, this inseparability of the dynamic structure of matter from the dynamic structure of space-time, that’s the source of temporal as well as mass relativity.11 But before we get to that description, we need to know more about primary-distortion-process interaction. 6.2 The gravitational distortion as the basis of primary-distortion-process interaction Question: What causes the change in the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic component of a primary distortion process, causing it to propagate relatively nonlinearly in a twisting pattern around the electromagnetic component of another primary distortion process? Answer: The radially distributed gravitational distortion associated with the other primary distortion process—i.e., the gravitational distortion associated with the other primary distortion process that it’s orbiting, twisting about, or interacting with. We will now explain this answer in detail. We know that gravitation “bends” light, i.e., changes its direction of propagation: Light “bends” or propagates toward matter or mass, i.e., in the direction of an increasing gravitational field, or in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion. We also know that matter, which is basically composed of electromagnetic radiation, is also drawn or attracted in the direction of an increasing gravitational field. Thus, within the context of the relational-matrix model, the attractive nature of the gravitational field or force can be understood as the result of the fact that electromagnetic radiation always propagates in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion. In other words, as described in 11 Both the observed rate of passage of time for an object and the mass of that object vary with material velocity, and so both are said to be relative, because both exist in relation to material velocity. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 302 Article 2, the linear component of the linear-radial distortion complex always has its direction of propagation altered toward the direction in which the radial component is increasing.12 The gravitational distortion isn’t an attractive force in and of itself. Rather, because the gravitational distortion always propagates in the form of a radially distributed distortion gradient, it functions as an attractive force. In other words, the gravitational-distortion gradient that always exists around electromagnetic radiation and matter (matter being composed of interacting EMRgravitation complexes) is what makes gravitation function as an attractive field or force. What we observe as gravitational attraction is simply the consistent alteration of the direction of propagation of electromagnetic radiation in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion. Were there no gravitational-distortion gradient—i.e., if the gravitational distortion was uniformly, rather than radially distributed—the gravitational distortion would be unable to alter the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic component, and so there’d be no apparent gravitational attraction. Thus, it’s not the gravitational distortion itself that’s attractive; rather, it’s how the gravitational distortion is always radially distributed around electromagnetic radiation and matter that makes the gravitational distortion function as attractive. In other words, gravitation doesn’t attract electromagnetic radiation or matter by pulling on it from a distance; rather, it attracts electromagnetic radiation and, thus, matter by simply altering the direction of propagation of electromagnetic radiation in a consistent manner. Since the spatial distribution of the gravitational distortion is consistent (i.e., radially propagating from its point or axis of origin), and since the alteration of the direction of propagation of electromagnetic radiation is also consistent (i.e., always occurring in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion), what we observe as the always-attractive nature of gravitation is nothing more than the consistent result of this consistent interaction between the complementary electromagnetic and gravitational components of different primary distortion processes. Therefore, when two primary distortion complexes come into proximity, the direction of propagation of each’s linear electromagnetic component may be mutually and simultaneously altered by the other’s radial gravitational component, as depicted in figure 41 (which is identical to figure 29). As we will explain more fully in the next subsection, this scenario forms the basis of stable repetitive interactions between primary distortion processes. Furthermore, the radially distributed gravitational distortion forms the basis of, and is the force underlying, the stable repetitive interactions between distortion processes that compose the dynamic structures we observe as matter. 12 See article 2, subsection 7.23, figure 29. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality ½ POCE 303 ½ POCE Figure 41 The gravitational basis of primary-distortion-process interaction, depicted here as the mutual alteration of the direction of propagation of each primary distortion process’ linear electromagnetic component by the other’s radial gravitational component. Depicted here are two primary distortion processes, each composed of a linear electromagnetic distortion (black areas) and a coexistent radial gravitational distortion (gray areas). The electromagnetic distortion propagates linearly through the relational structure of space-time, leaving a radially propagating gravitational “wake” in its path. When two primary distortion processes come into proximity, each’s direction of propagation can be affected by the other’s gravitational “wake,” such that the direction of propagation of each’s linear electromagnetic component is altered toward the direction of propagation of the other’s. The direction of propagation of each’s linear electromagnetic component is always altered in the direction of the other’s because the linear component of the primary distortion process—i.e., the maximal distortion—always propagates into the next adjacent reality cell that first reaches the level of maximal distortion. As long as the gravitational distortion around the linear component is balanced (as in the drawing on the left), the maximal distortion propagates into the next adjacent reality cell in linear progression, resulting in the linear propagation of the electromagnetic component. However, when the surrounding gravitational distortion is unbalanced, such as when the gravitational “wake” from another primary distortion process is encountered (as in the two drawings to the right), the next adjacent reality cell that first reaches the level of maximal distortion isn’t the one that’s in linear progression, but rather is the one in the direction from which the encountered gravitational “wake” is coming—i.e., in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion. This is why gravitation seems “attractive”—because electromagnetic radiation always has its direction of propagation altered in the direction of an increasing gravitational-distortion gradient, and that gradient always increases in the direction from which it originates as part of a primary distortion process. This mutual and simultaneous alteration of the direction of propagation of each’s electromagnetic component by the other’s gravitational component forms the basis of the stable repetitive interactions between the primary distortion processes that compose the dynamic structures we experience as matter. Therefore, the gravitational distortion is the force that’s primarily responsible for bringing and holding electromagnetic energy together in the form of matter. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 304 In summary, electromagnetic radiation and matter are affected by a gravitational distortion (i.e., by having their direction of propagation altered) for the same reason that primary distortion processes stably and repetitively interact so as to form matter in the first place. Because the structure of space-time is uniform and consistent at all levels of scale, forces can act in the same way at all levels of scale. Thus, the force that holds a planet in orbit around a star (i.e., gravitation) is the same as the force that holds electromagnetic wavicles in mutual orbits around each other to form matter. Buckminster Fuller’s recognition that “all the conditions of energy be everywhere the same” led him to search for a spatial structure that was consistent throughout and at all levels of scale, and what ultimately led him to develop the isotropic-vector matrix as the representation of such a structure.13 Again, the isotropic-vector matrix is the vector representation of the relationships that exist between spheres in a cubic-closepacking array, as well as a representation of the relationships between the reality cells that make up any relational level of reality within the relational matrix. We will now discuss how primary distortion processes can engage in stable repetitive interactions. We will then examine the properties of the compound distortion processes that exist as the result of those repetitive interactions. 6.3 Repetitive primary-distortion-process interactions (interactive-process stability and pattern integrity) As explained in the previous subsection, when two primary distortion processes come into proximity, the radial gravitational distortion associated with each can alter the direction of propagation of the other’s electromagnetic component. We can then imagine at least two scenarios that might occur when two primary distortion processes come into proximity, or approach intersection, as depicted in figure 42. In the first scenario, the two primary distortion processes might interact in a way that alters each’s direction of propagation, but not repetitively. In this scenario, as the two primary distortion processes approach one another, each’s direction of propagation is altered. After this interaction, each primary distortion process propagates away from the other with a new linear direction of propagation that’s a result of their interaction. In the second scenario, the two primary distortion processes again might interact in a way that alters each’s direction of propagation, but repetitively. In this scenario, each primary distortion process has its linear direction of propagation repetitively altered by the other’s radial gravitational distortion. After their initial interaction, however, the two primary distortion processes don’t propagate away from one another; rather, each becomes caught up in the other’s 13 Amy C. Edmondson, A Fuller Explanation: The Synergetic Geometry of R. Buckminster Fuller. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 305 gravitational “wake,” a situation we will call interactive-process stability, thereby creating a twisting pattern of interaction.14 non-repetitive interaction repetitive interaction Figure 42 Two possible types of interactions that can occur when two primary distortion processes come into proximity. Only the electromagnetic or maximaldistortion component of the primary distortion processes are shown here (two different shades of stippling). (Left) The gravitational distortion (not shown) associated with each primary distortion processes alters the direction of propagation of the other’s electromagnetic component, but not repetitively. (Right) The gravitational distortion associated with each primary distortion process alters the direction of propagation of the other’s electromagnetic component repetitively, creating a twisting pattern of primarydistortion-process interaction. This stable repetitive interaction that can occur between two or more primary distortion processes, which we will call a compound distortion process, represents the basic form of the dynamic structure of matter.15 “Interactive-process stability” is defined as the interaction of two or more primary distortion processes in such a way that a stable repetitive pattern of interaction is formed. In interactiveprocess stability, the gravitational distortion associated with each primary distortion process alters the other’s direction of propagation in a way that maintains their stable repetitive interaction. In interactive-process stability, the pattern of distortion propagation of each primary distortion process simultaneously alters the other’s pattern of distortion propagation, creating a stable repetitive pattern of interaction between them. 14 Note that, since each primary distortion process is traveling at the speed of light, in order for them to get caught in each other’s gravitational wake, there would need to exist a third such process to initially facilitate or mediate the interaction. For two primary distortion processes to get caught in each other’s gravitational “wake,” they would need to be “slowed down” (i.e., made to propagate nonlinearly) so that the gravitational distortion could pass on ahead, allowing each primary distortion process to alter the direction of propagation of the other. The facilitator process, once it has performed this initial ceremony, would continue on its way, leaving the two distortion processes twisting, dancing, or orbiting around each other in the marriage we call matter. For simplicity, we will ignore the necessity of this third facilitator process, since we’re concerned primarily with what happens once the distortion processes are interacting stably and repetitively as matter. 15 Note that all of the diagrams which we will use to depict compound processes represent a kind of “timelapse” drawing, in that they show multiple positions along the path of propagation of each primary distortion process, showing both where it is and where it has been, to make the patterns of distortion propagation clear. The same is true for most of the diagrams in this work that are used to depict propagating distortions. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 306 Such stable repetitive interactions between two or more primary distortion processes represent what we will call a compound distortion process, or simply a compound process. A compound process composed of just two interacting primary distortion processes we will call a compound process of the first order. Compound processes of the first order represent the most basic form of matter. That is, since matter is composed of the stable association of energy processes, two energy processes are the minimum required for forming such an association. This type of primary-distortion-process interaction creates a very powerful feedback mechanism, whereby the gravitational environment created by the pattern of distortion propagation of one primary distortion process, by affecting the direction of propagation of another primary distortion process, itself helps to create the gravitational environment that alters its own pattern of distortion propagation. In this way, the two primary distortion processes continue to propagate, twisting around or orbiting one another in a stable repetitive interaction, each locked or knotted into that pattern of distortion propagation by the other and by itself. In interactiveprocess stability, each primary distortion process acts simultaneously and interchangeably as both cause and effect, in a self-perpetuating, self-sustaining pattern of distortion propagation. Such a stable repetitive interaction will continue indefinitely until something disturbs it—i.e., until another distortion process comes along that’s able to alter the gravitational environment that’s sustaining the interaction. Buckminster Fuller understood matter to represent stable patterns of interaction between energy processes, and so he referred to matter as a pattern integrity. Fuller used this term to stress the dynamic structure of matter; that matter isn’t something static but, rather, is a dynamic pattern of interaction, a set of stable relationships, between always-moving energy processes. Compound distortion processes are a special type of pattern integrity. Again, structure is relationship, and the structure of matter is composed of stable relationships between energy processes. How can consistent or stable relationships be formed between processes that are always moving? Through each process locking or knotting the other process(es) into a pattern of movement that’s also integral to its own pattern of movement, thus creating a pattern integrity, an integrated (whole) pattern of movement, wherein the pattern of movement of each component process is integral to the pattern of movement of the other(s) and so, through feedback, to its own pattern of movement as well. Pattern integrities in general and compound processes in particular are both the result of interactive-process stability. To illustrate the relationship between the dynamic structure and the underlying process, we will use Fuller’s method of illustrating the concept of pattern integrity. To illustrate a pattern integrity, Fuller would use the example of a simple overhand knot in a rope.16 The knot appears to be an object, but it’s actually nothing more than a pattern the rope has in a certain area, owing to a relationship it has formed with itself. However, this pattern isn’t just any pattern, but is self-sustaining. Not all patterns are pattern integrities, only those that are self-sustaining—i.e., only those formed as a result of interactive-process stability, as depicted in figure 43. 16 Amy C. Edmondson, A Fuller Explanation: The Synergetic Geometry of R. Buckminster Fuller. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality no interactive-process stability no pattern integrity interactive-process stability pattern integrity 307 Figure 43 The relationship between interactive-process stability and pattern integrity, showing how the pattern integrity we call a knot is maintained by interactive-process stability. The two diagrams at the top show patterns that aren’t pattern integrities, because they don’t have interactive-process stability. The two diagrams at the bottom show patterns that are pattern integrities, because they have interactive-process stability. In the diagram at the bottom left, the rope is knotted as an example of a pattern integrity. In the diagram at the bottom right, two primary distortion processes are caught up in each other’s gravitational “wake,” forming the pattern integrity that’s referred to as a compound distortion process. If we pull on the ends of the rope in the diagram at the top left, the pattern disappears, because this isn’t a pattern that has interactiveprocess stability. If we pull on the ends of the rope in the diagram at the bottom left, the knot (i.e., the pattern) remains, because this is a pattern that has interactive-process stability, inasmuch as each part of the knot is binding the other parts of the knot into a position that’s simultaneously binding upon itself. In the diagram at the bottom right, although they aren’t depicted, the gravitational distortions are what’s responsible for interactive-process stability, because they act to “knot” the electromagnetic components together, with each distortion process binding the others into a pattern of distortion propagation that’s simultaneously binding upon itself, thereby creating the pattern integrity, the self-sustaining, self-perpetuating pattern of distortion propagation, defined as a compound distortion process. Thus, both the knot and the compound process (i.e., matter) are examples of pattern integrities formed through interactive-process stability. Understanding the structure of matter in this way, we can see that matter is composed of compounded or associated energy in the form of interacting EMR-gravitation complexes. Thus, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 308 the relational-matrix model provides a context for understanding the basis of the equivalence of matter and energy, as stated in Einstein’s famous equation E = mc2. Because matter represents a stable relationship between energy processes, matter has unique properties which exist as a function of that relationship and which vary as that relationship varies. Two of those material properties are time and mass. We will examine how time and mass come to exist as a result of the stable relationship between energy processes that exists as matter, and how time and mass vary as this relationship varies. By relating energy to the structure of space, and matter to the structure of energy, we have now provided the basis for relating matter to the structure of space. Because matter is compounded energy, and because the properties of energy exist as extensions of the dynamic structure of space, we will be able to demonstrate the connection between matter and space, showing how the variable structural and dynamic properties of matter extend from, and exist in relation to, the invariant structural and dynamic aspects of space. In making this connection, it will become apparent why both time and mass exist relative to, or as a function of, material velocity as a percentage of the speed-of-light constant. However, before we can examine this connection in detail, we first need to discuss certain aspects of the pattern integrities that are compound distortion processes. Conceptual checkpoint I-8 -Matter is a dynamic structure, composed of the stable repetitive interaction of two or more primary distortion processes (i.e., two or more EMR-gravitation complexes). -Matter represents the third level of existential self-relation, or the third way in which existence is able to form relationships with itself. -The stable repetitive interaction of two or more primary distortion processes is mediated by the gravitational distortions associated with those interacting primary distortion processes. -The gravitational distortion can cause the stable repetitive interaction of two or more primary distortion processes by acting to consistently and continuously alter the direction of propagation of each’s electromagnetic component in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion, thereby creating a self-sustaining, self-perpetuating pattern of distortion propagation. -The mechanism by which each primary distortion process acts to bind other primary distortion processes into a certain pattern of distortion propagation, which, in turn, binds itself into a certain pattern of distortion propagation, is called interactive-process stability. -The result of interactive-process stability is a pattern integrity, i.e., a self-sustaining, selfperpetuating pattern of distortion propagation. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 309 -In terms of primary distortion processes, the pattern integrity formed through interactive-process stability is the self-sustaining, self-perpetuating pattern of distortion propagation called a compound distortion process. -The basic pattern of association of primary distortion processes, as they stably and repetitively interact to form a compound distortion process, is that of a twist or spiral, caused by the electromagnetic component of each primary distortion process twisting around or orbiting the other’s electromagnetic component. -A compound process of the first order, which is a compound distortion process composed of just two interacting primary distortion processes, represents the most basic form of matter. Section 7 The Anatomy of Compound Processes Because compound processes of the first order represent the simplest or most basic form of matter, we will examine compound processes in general primarily in terms of compound processes of the first order, with the understanding that, owing to the uniform and consistent structure of space-time, such an analysis is also applicable to higher-order compound processes, i.e., those made up of more than two primary distortion processes. 7.1 Compound-process periods The basic pattern of association of two primary distortion processes, as they stably and repetitively interact to form what we have defined as a compound process of the first order, is that of a twist or spiral, as depicted in figures 40, 42, and 43. Before such interaction, the electromagnetic component of each primary distortion process propagates linearly through the relational matrix—i.e., space-time—at the speed of light. However, once two primary distortion processes stably and repetitively interact to form a compound distortion process, the propagation of each primary distortion process becomes relatively nonlinear. Although the individual electromagnetic components of the primary distortion process that make up a compound process still propagate through space-time at the speed of light, because their propagation is relatively nonlinear, the compound process as a whole then propagates linearly through space-time at less than the speed of light. The precise velocity of a compound process depends on the degree of linearity of propagation of the electromagnetic components of the primary distortion processes that make up the compound process. This situation is analogous to three cars going the same speed, one on a straight road, one on a curvy or snaky road, and another on an even curvier or snakier road. To a distant observer, the car on the straight road will seem to be going faster than the other two cars, since the speed of the cars is determined by their linear progress, which is less for the car traveling the snaky road, and even less for the car traveling the even snakier road. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 310 The basic pattern of association by which two primary distortion processes interact to form a compound process of the first order is both repetitive and symmetrical. Each component process must propagate through space-time with the same degree of nonlinearity, or else they couldn’t interact, because one primary distortion process would bypass the other, since they both continue to propagate through space-time at the speed of light, albeit nonlinearly. That this basic pattern of association is both repetitive and symmetrical allows us to define the existence of a compound process in terms of a cycle or period, as we also did with regard to the reality-cell period of content exchange (POCE). As the electromagnetic components of the primary distortion processes twist around or orbit one another, when they return to an identical point in their relationship, this cycle is defined as one compound-process period (CPP), as depicted in figure 44. POCE = 0 POCE = 6 POCE = 12 CPP = 0 CPP = 1 CPP = 2 pdp pdp cp Figure 44 The concept of a compound-process period (CPP), as well as the relationship of the CPP to the reality-cell period of content exchange (POCE). In the lower part of this diagram, a compound process (cp) of the first order composed of two interacting primary distortion processes is depicted. In the upper part of this diagram, the electromagnetic components of two noninteracting primary distortion processes (pdp) are depicted. The basic pattern of association by which two primary distortion processes stably and repetitively interact to form a compound process of the first order, has been described as the electromagnetic components twisting around or orbiting each other, owing to the influence of their associated gravitational components. This pattern of interaction is both repetitive and symmetrical and so is periodic in nature. A single CPP period is defined as one full cycle of interaction between the component processes that make up the compound process. In the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 311 compound process in this figure, the blue circle is referenced as the starting point, and the green and red circles represent one and two CPPs, respectively. As defined in Article 2, a distortion propagates linearly two reality cells in each POCE. A compound process requires multiple POCEs for linear propagation. Because the primary distortion-process interactions that form a CPP are driven by the reality-cell POCE, there’s always more than one reality-cell POCE for each CPP. Comparing the linearly propagating distortions in the upper part of the diagram with the compound process in the lower part, the cross-hatched circle marks six POCEs for each primary distortion process, which together make up a single CPP for the compound process as a whole. In other words, for this particular compound process, it takes six POCEs to complete one CPP. This comparison shows the difference in the degree of linearity of propagation within the same number of POCEs between noninteracting primary distortion processes and primary distortion processes interacting to form a compound process.17 The relationship of the CPP to the POCE is what we will later show to be the link between time and the speed-of-light constant. 7.2 Compound processes of the second order and beyond When two compound processes of the first order interact in such a way that they achieve interactive-process stability, there then exists a compound process of the second order. The primary distortion processes that make up a compound process of the second order interact for the same reason, and have the same basic pattern of association, as the primary distortion processes that make up a compound process of the first order. That is, compound processes of the second order are formed as two compound processes of the first order get caught up in each other’s gravitational “wake,” resulting in another level of pattern integrity that has the same twisting pattern of association as do the component processes. However, in a compound process of the second order, that twisting pattern of association now takes place at a larger interactive scale, as depicted in figure 45. 17 Note here the use of the phrase “in the same number of POCEs” rather than “in the same amount of time,” for, as we will show, time is a function and manifestation of the periodic nature and activity of compound processes that has as its basis the dynamic spatial structure. Thus, dynamic comparisons between primary distortion processes and compound processes must be made in terms of the POCE rather than in terms of time, since the concept of time can’t be applied to a primary distortion process. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality a b a 312 b Figure 45 Two compound processes of the first order (a and b) interacting to form a compound process of the second order. Just as the stable repetitive interaction between two primary distortion processes occurs in a twisting pattern, so too does the stable repetitive interaction between two compound distortion processes. (To make the diagram less cluttered, while still showing the twisting pattern of interaction, the upstroke of each compound process of the first order is depicted as two straight lines.) A compound process of the third order could be formed by two compound process of the second order stably and repetitively interacting, again in a twisting pattern. As interacting distortion processes become more compounded, the twisting pattern of association remains essentially the same, with only the scale of the interaction changing. The uniformity and consistency of the spatial structure at all scales, or at all relational levels of reality, is what allows for the repetition of this basic pattern of association. Each scale of distortion-process interaction or compoundment provides the raw material for the next. Thus, once such a basic pattern of association exists, one distortion process can then interact with another distortion process to form a higher-order compound process, which can then interact with another distortion process to form an even higher-order compound process, and so on. In this way, existence continues to evolve into more elaborate structures through a process of repetitive and progressive self-relation, with each level of structure and relationship providing the raw material for the next. Note that, although the basic pattern of association of distortion processes—i.e., twisting around or orbiting each other—remains the same at all interactive scales, the interaction can become and appear progressively more convoluted, the more compounded those distortion processes become. This situation is somewhat analogous to what happens when a string is twisted repetitively upon itself until it eventually begins to bunch up upon itself in various ways. Likewise, as distortion ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 313 processes become more compounded, with their patterns of interaction becoming increasingly twisted, it’s possible, likely, and probably inevitable that the gravitational field generated by the compound process as a whole will act to attract itself, causing the compound process to bunch up or acquire a structural configuration with an appearance of more than just a simple twist. In this way, EMR-gravitation complexes interact to form subatomic or quantum particles, subatomic particles interact to form atoms, atoms interact to form molecules, and molecules interact to form organisms.18 Although at larger scales the particular patterns of association may vary, the interactions themselves always have as their basis interactive-process stability, i.e., the existence of mutually supportive and mutually binding environments between interacting distortion processes. With increasing scale of distortion-process interaction or compoundment, the rate of propagation through the relational matrix—i.e., through space-time—for that higher-order compound process becomes a smaller and smaller percentage of the speed of light. Although each primary distortion process is still propagating within the compound distortion process at the speed of light, with each successively higher order interaction these primary distortion processes must propagate more and more nonlinearly, as their interactions become increasingly twisted. Thus, the primary distortion processes have farther to go, more reality cells to traverse, in order for the higher-order compound process as a whole to propagate linearly. At the interactive scale depicted in figure 45, a compound process of the second order is traveling at a velocity that’s one-fourth the speed of light—i.e., at one-fourth the rate of propagation of the primary distortion processes that compose it. This point is vital, and so we will repeat it. Primary distortion processes don’t actually slow down when they stably and repetitively interact to form a compound distortion process. Rather, they continue individually to propagate at the rate-of-penetration constant, which, as we have already described, is equivalent to the speed-of-light constant. However, because primary distortion processes must propagate nonlinearly in order to stably and repetitively interact, they then appear individually to propagate at less than the speed of light, and the compound process as a whole also must propagate at less than the speed of light. As we will show, this concept is central to understanding why temporal relativity exists and, more specifically, why it exists in relation to, and as a function of, the speed-of-light constant. 7.3 Compound-process propagation How the rate of propagation of a compound process through the relational matrix (i.e., the velocity of matter through space-time) relates to the degree of linearity of propagation of the 18 At higher orders of distortion-process interaction, there are other forces that are also acting to maintain the pattern integrity of interacting compound processes. The unified model of reality presented in this work deals only with the electromagnetic and gravitational forces, which are two of what are now considered to be the four fundamental fields or forces responsible for all material interactions. The other two fundamental forces, the strong and weak nuclear forces, are thought to mediate or hold quantum particles together to form atomic nuclei. As explained previously in article 3, subsection 4.4, all fields, all forces, all energy, must represent some distortion of the uniform pattern of spatial content. Thus, these other forces may represent different primary patterns of distortion, or they may represent secondary patterns of distortion that exist only as a result of more fundamental distortion-process interactions. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 314 primary distortion processes which make up that compound process is depicted in figures 46 and 47. Linear POCE 0 5 10 15 Propagation as % of Speed of Light 100 cp 50 cp 50 cp 50 cp 50 cp 50 pdp 100 Figure 46 The relationship between the pattern of primary-distortion-process interaction and the rate of compound-process propagation when there is complete nonlinearity of propagation. What this figure shows is that variation of the nonlinear component in a compound process (cp) (i.e., the varying up or down slope of the electromagnetic component of the primary distortion processes (pdp’s)) doesn’t alter the rate of compound-process propagation, inasmuch as it remains 50 percent of the speed of light regardless. The differently patterned reality cells (vertically striped, checkerboard, and horizontally striped) show how far a distortion would propagate within a given number of periods of content exchange (POCEs), when it’s propagating linearly and varyingly nonlinearly. As previously described and defined, a distortion propagates two reality cells every POCE. The compound processes depicted in this diagram travel only one-half the linear distance that the linearly propagating pdp’s do within the same number of POCEs. Since the linear propagation of the pdp’s occurs at ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 315 the speed of light, the propagation of the compound processes is occurring at one-half the speed of light. To use a car analogy, what figure 46 shows is that if any number of cars going the same speed travel on different curvy roads that have no linear sections, they all end up going half the linear distance that a car traveling the same speed goes on a road with no curves in the same amount of time, regardless of the size of those curves. Now, let’s see what happens when linear sections of different lengths are added to those curves, as depicted in figure 47. Linear POCE Propagation as % of the speed 100 of light cp 50 cp 60 cp 66.7 cp 70 cp 76.7 pdp 100 0 5 10 15 Figure 47 The relationship between the pattern of primary-distortion-process (pdp) interaction and the rate of compound-process (cp) propagation when there is a varying degree of linearity of propagation, with nonlinearity (up and down slope) held constant. The compound processes depicted in this diagram each have an increasing degree of linearity of propagation from top to bottom. In the compound process at the top, the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 316 component processes are propagating completely nonlinearly. What this diagram shows is that, as the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes increases, the rate of propagation of the compound process as a whole also increases, bringing it ever closer to the speed of light. Again, the differently patterned reality cells (vertically striped, checkerboard, and horizontally striped) show how far a distortion propagates within a given number of periods of content exchange (POCEs), when it’s propagating completely linearly (pdp) and with varying degrees of linearity (cp). As previously described and defined, a distortion propagates two reality cells every POCE. Note that, as the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes becomes relatively greater or less, the periodic activity intrinsic to the compound process as a whole is altered. This alteration of compound-process periodicity that accompanies changes in material velocity forms the basis of temporal relativity. The patterns of distortion propagation depicted in figures 46 and 47 are those that are permitted by the dynamic structure of space-time. An important feature regarding variations in the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes, as depicted in figure 47, is that these variations result in alterations of the periodicity intrinsic to the compound process as a whole. Thus, as the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes becomes relatively greater, the periodicity intrinsic to the compound process as a whole becomes relatively less, meaning that it takes more periods of content exchange for the compound process to complete one full cycle or period of component-process interaction. Conversely, as the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes becomes relatively less, the periodicity intrinsic to the compound process as a whole becomes relatively greater, meaning that it takes fewer periods of content exchange for the compound process to complete one full cycle or period of component-process interaction. Matter is a dynamic structure, composed of interacting distortion (i.e., energy) processes that are propagating nonlinearly through space-time at the speed of light. As material velocity varies, the interactive material structure varies, i.e., the periodicity intrinsic to the matter itself must also vary, because material velocity is a function of the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes, just as the periodicity intrinsic to a compound process is also a function of the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes. This unbreakable connection between material velocity and compound-process periodicity is the basis of temporal relativity. The connection between material velocity and interactive material structure is the basis of the relativity of mass. Both temporal and mass relativity exist because any change in material velocity must be accompanied by some change in the dynamic structure of the matter—i.e., by some change in the relationship between the energy processes that are interacting to form the matter. These two topics, temporal and mass relativity, will be discussed in greater detail in a later section. The speed of light is observed to exist when there’s complete linearity of distortion propagation through the relational matrix. When primary distortion processes interact to form a compound process of the first order, the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes becomes relatively less. That relative nonlinearity of propagation results in the compound ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 317 process as a whole traveling through space-time at less than the speed of light, although the component processes continue to propagate at the speed of light, albeit nonlinearly. To summarize, material velocity is purely a function of the interactive structure of the component processes that make up matter. The less the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes that make up the matter, the lower the material velocity will be. Conversely, the greater the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes that make up the matter, the higher the material velocity will be. According to Einstein’s relativity theory, an infinite amount of energy would be required to accelerate matter to the speed of light, and if a material object did attain a velocity equal to the speed of light, it would have an infinite mass. Since these conditions can’t exist, according to relativity theory, matter can’t travel at a velocity that’s equal to or greater than the speed of light. The way we have described matter within the context of the relational-matrix model explains in terms of the dynamic spatial structure why matter cannot travel at a velocity that’s equal to or greater than the speed of light. The only way a compound process (i.e., matter) could travel at the speed of light would be if there were complete linearity of propagation of the component processes. However, if there’s complete linearity of propagation of the component processes, then there can be no interaction of the component processes, and so therefore there wouldn’t be an existent compound process—i.e., there’d be no matter, no material object, as such. The points made in the last paragraph make moot the issue of whether or not matter can travel at a velocity greater than the speed of light, but for completeness we will address this issue anyway. How can a material object travel at a velocity that exceeds the maximum and constant velocity of the processes which compose it? It can’t, and so it doesn’t. To summarize, the nature of matter as being fundamentally composed of interacting distortion (i.e., energy) processes, which in order to interact are propagating to some degree nonlinearly, precludes matter from existing as such in a state in which those distortion processes can’t interact, i.e., in a state where there’s complete linearity of propagation of the component processes—as would need to be the case for matter to travel at the speed of light. Matter is a dynamic structure, and it can’t exist as such in the absence of the relationships—i.e., in the absence of the nonlinear primary-distortion-process interactions—of which its dynamic structure is composed. Thus, the relational-matrix model is both consistent with, and explains the basis of, the aspect of relativity theory which holds that matter cannot travel at a velocity equal to or greater than the speed of light. 7.4 Compound processes and the spatial distribution of the gravitational distortion The purpose of this subsection is to describe, in terms of both degree of distortion content and spatial distribution of distortion content, how the gravitational components of primary distortion processes are affected when primary distortion processes interact to form a compound process. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 318 One effect upon the gravitational component of a primary distortion process when it stably and repetitively interacts with another primary distortion process is an alteration of the spatial relationship between the electromagnetic component and the gravitational component of both distortion processes. In a noninteracting primary distortion process (i.e., one that’s propagating with complete linearity), the linear electromagnetic component propagates ahead of the radial gravitational component. Conversely, when a primary distortion process stably and repetitively interacts with another primary distortion process to form a compound process, the gravitational components are then able to propagate ahead or in front of the electromagnetic components. It’s in this way and for this reason that matter, as a compound distortion process, becomes associated with a surrounding gravitational field, as depicted in figure 48. the surrounding of matter by a gravitational field Figure 48 What happens to the relationship between the electromagnetic and gravitational components of a primary distortion process when it stably and repetitively interacts with another primary distortion process to form a compound process. (Left) The gravitational components (gray) of two linearly propagating primary distortion processes fan out behind the electromagnetic components (black and stippled circles). Note that in these drawings the next reality cell in sequence that will become maximally distorted is represented by a crosshatched circle. (Right) In two primary distortion processes interacting to form a compound process (i.e., matter), the gravitational component, still propagating radially at the speed of light, is able to propagate out ahead or in front of the interacting electromagnetic components, resulting in the compound process being surrounded by a gravitational distortion gradient—i.e., a gravitational field. Thus, the diagram on the right depicts the fundamental mechanism by which matter becomes associated with a surrounding gravitational field, and so depicts the fundamental reason why matter and gravitation are always found in association. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 319 The relationship of the electromagnetic component to the gravitational component can be compared to the relationship of a boat to its wake, where the boat represents the electromagnetic component and the wake represents the gravitational component. As long as the boat travels linearly at a rate equal to the speed of water waves, the wake will remain behind the boat. If the boat begins to zigzag, so that its rate of linear travel is less than the speed of water waves, then the wake or waves created by the boat will catch up to and pass ahead of the boat. Likewise, as long as the electromagnetic component (the boat) is propagating linearly at the speed of light, the associated gravitational component (the wake) fans out behind it. However, once the electromagnetic component becomes part of a compound process and begins to propagate relatively nonlinearly, its rate of linear travel as part of that compound process is less than the speed of light. This lower velocity allows the gravitational component, which propagates with diminishing distortion content radially at the speed of light, to propagate out ahead or in front of the compound process, surrounding the compound process with a radial or oblong gravitational-distortion gradient—i.e., a gravitational field. Another effect that primary-distortion-process interaction has upon the associated gravitational distortions is to bring the gravitational distortions from different primary distortion processes into proximity, causing a gravitational overlap. This gravitational overlap causes an additive effect, in which the compound process then radiates around itself a stronger gravitational distortion than any individual primary distortion process alone could generate or radiate. In a linearly propagating, noninteracting primary distortion process, the gravitational component propagates radially away from its point or axis of origin with a decreasing distortion content. When a primary distortion process stably and repetitively interacts with another primary distortion process to form a compound process, the gravitational components still propagate radially with a decreasing distortion content. However, owing to the additive effect of overlapping gravitational distortions, the compound process becomes surrounded by a relatively stronger gravitational distortion than that which is associated with either primary distortion process alone.19 It’s in this way and for this reason that matter becomes associated with a surrounding gravitational field whose strength (i.e., attractiveness) increases as the number of primary distortion processes composing the matter increases. For, as we will describe in an upcoming section, the number of interacting primary distortion processes composing matter is directly related to the mass of the matter. All other things being equal (i.e., with no variation in the parameters that are responsible for the relativity of mass, which we will discuss later), the more primary distortion processes interacting to compose a material object, the greater its mass, and the stronger its associated gravitational field. 19 See article 2, subsection 7.22. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 320 7.5 Gravitation’s attractive nature The purpose of this subsection is to explain, in terms of the relational matrix, the mechanism of gravitational attraction as it applies to compound processes or matter. We have already discussed this subject to some extent in Article 3, subsection 6.2. To summarize what was stated there, the attractive nature of the gravitational field or force can be understood as the manifestation of the fact that the electromagnetic component of a primary distortion process always propagates in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion.20 Owing to the diminishment or dilution of distortion content that accompanies the radially distributed gravitational distortion that is a gravitational field, gravitation is always encountered in the form of a distortion gradient that has a consistent orientation, inasmuch as the distortion content always increases in the direction of the matter or mass from which it radiates. Therefore, any matter that encounters gravitation does so in such a way that there’s always an increasing gravitational distortion in the direction of the matter which is radiating or generating the encountered gravitational-distortion gradient or gravitational field. This gradient was depicted in figure 48 as lighter shades of gray surrounding the compound process. When one material object is attracted to another by gravitation, what’s really happening is that the electromagnetic components of the primary distortion processes which form the one material object are having their direction of propagation altered in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion by the gravitational-distortion gradient surrounding the other material object. Since the gravitational-distortion content always increases in the direction of the matter from which it radiates, the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic components of a primary distortion process is always altered in the direction of that matter, causing the gravitational distortion, which always exists in a gradient, to function as an attractive force on both energy processes and material objects. However, the gravitational distortion isn’t itself attractive; rather, the consistent way in which the gravitational distortion is spatially distributed around energy and matter in the form of a gradient is what causes the gravitational distortion to function in a consistently attractive manner. We will now use this concept to explain why and how matter accelerates in a gravitational field. 7.6 Gravitational acceleration “Gravitational acceleration” refers to what happens to material velocity when matter encounters a gravitational field. For example, if a rock is dropped from a tall building, the velocity of the rock increases incrementally as it falls, as it’s attracted to the Earth by the Earth’s gravitational 20 To review, the electromagnetic component of a primary distortion process always propagates in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion because the electromagnetic or maximal-distortion component of the linear-radial distortion complex always propagates into the next adjacent reality cell that reaches the level of maximal distortion. When there’s no other gravitational distortion present, that propagation occurs in linear sequence, resulting in linear propagation of the electromagnetic component. However, when another gravitational distortion is encountered, the next adjacent reality cell that first reaches the level of maximal distortion is always one that’s on the side with the greatest gravitational distortion, causing the maximal distortion to propagate into a reality cell not in linear sequence, resulting in the alteration or bending of the direction of electromagnetic propagation. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 321 field. This incremental increase in material velocity caused by the gravitational field or force is called gravitational acceleration. One of the most interesting things about gravitational acceleration is that all material objects, regardless of their weight, size, or shape, accelerate at the same rate when they encounter the same gravitational field. That is, a large rock doesn’t accelerate or fall to earth any faster than would a feather (if such things were dropped in a vacuum where the effects of air resistance are eliminated).21 This feature of the gravitational field or force was discovered at the beginning of the 17th century by the Italian physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilei. We are now, several hundred years later, going to find out why this is so. In this subsection, we will show the mechanism of gravitational acceleration to have as its basis the same simple mechanism as that which is responsible for gravitational attraction. That is, we will show that, like gravitational attraction, gravitational acceleration exists as a result of the consistent alteration of the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic components of the primary distortion processes that make up a compound process in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion. In other words, the gravitational-distortion gradient, by altering the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic components of a compound process, also accelerates or incrementally increases the rate of propagation of the compound process as a whole. There’s no way to cause a primary distortion process to propagate faster than the speed of light, because the speed of light is itself a manifestation of the dynamic structure of space-time. Therefore, a gravitational-distortion gradient can’t accelerate electromagnetic radiation that’s propagating linearly at the speed of light; all it can do is alter its direction of propagation. However, when electromagnetic radiation is part of a compound process (i.e., matter), the individual electromagnetic components propagate nonlinearly at the speed of light, but the compound process as a whole propagates linearly at less than the speed of light. Again, the rate of propagation of a compound process through the relational matrix is a function of the degree of linearity of propagation of the primary distortion processes that make it up. The gravitational-distortion gradient, by altering the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic components of a compound process (i.e., matter), can increase their degree of linearity of propagation and so cause the compound process as a whole to propagate through space-time at an increased rate— i.e., at a higher velocity. The gravitational field, because it always exists in a gradient of lesser to greater distortion content, increases this degree of linearity of propagation incrementally, and so the rate of propagation of the compound process also increases incrementally, since the closer the compound process gets to the attractive mass, the greater becomes the gravitational distortion. As the gravitational distortion increases, the degree of linearity of propagation of the 21 Under normal conditions, a feather falls more slowly than a rock not because its acceleration due to gravity is less but because air resistance slows it more. The force of air resistance varies with the surface area of an object, and so a material object that spreads its weight over a greater area meets more resistance and thus drops more slowly, although the gravitational acceleration is really the same. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 322 electromagnetic components of the compound process also increases, thus increasing incrementally the velocity of the compound process as a whole. In a way, acceleration represents a vicious cycle. Gravitation “bends” the direction of propagation of the component processes that make up matter toward the source of the gravitation, causing the matter to move at an increased velocity. This “bending” brings the matter closer to the source of gravitation, putting it in a stronger gravitational field, thereby “bending” the direction of propagation of the component processes even more, causing the matter to move even faster while being subjected to an ever-stronger gravitational field, “bending” the direction of propagation of the component processes even more, and so on. Gravitational acceleration, then, is what is observed as the incremental increase in material velocity that occurs as the result of the increasing degree of linearity of propagation of matter’s component processes, owing to that matter moving in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion, i.e., into an everstronger gravitational field, as depicted in figure 49. reality cell POCEs 8 increasing gravitation distortion (field) 8 8 8 matter generating a gravitational field increasing propagational linearity of component processes 50% increasing compound process velocity (acceleration) 70 60% 66.7 76.7 velocity of CP as % of light speed Figure 49 A compound process (CP) that is accelerating, owing to a gravitational field that’s being generated by, and exists in association with, the matter on the right. As the CP encounters the gravitational field, the direction of propagation of its component processes (black and stippled circles) is altered in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion (increasingly dark shades of gray from left to right), increasing the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes, and thus both increasing the velocity of the CP as a whole and attracting it in the direction of the matter that’s generating the gravitational field. This increase in velocity (i.e., acceleration) moves the CP into an even stronger gravitational distortion, further increasing the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes, again both increasing the velocity of the CP as a whole and attracting it in the direction of the matter that’s generating the gravitational field, and so on. The continuous repetition of this cycle is what we observe as gravitational acceleration. In this way, the alteration of the direction of propagation of the component processes causes both the attraction and the acceleration of the CP as a whole toward the matter that’s generating the gravitational field. The attraction of matter to other matter due to gravitation is a function of the alteration of the direction of propagation of the component processes in the direction of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 323 increasing gravitational distortion. The acceleration of matter due to gravitation is a function of the increased degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes which accompanies that alteration in their direction of propagation. The component processes always propagate at the speed of light. However, interacting to form a CP, they propagate nonlinearly. The velocity of the CP as a whole is determined by the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes. As the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes increases, the velocity of the CP as a whole also increases. Basically, the less zigzaggy the path of the component processes, the farther they and the CP they make up propagate within a given number of periods of content exchange (POCEs). In later sections, we will demonstrate that this variation in the dynamic structure of matter is responsible for the relativity of time and mass as a function of material velocity. This way of understanding the mechanism underlying gravitational attraction and acceleration also explains why the gravitational force acts independent of the mass of the matter it’s acting upon—i.e., it explains why a pebble, a boulder, and a feather are all accelerated by the Earth’s gravitational field at the same rate in a vacuum. The equivalence of material acceleration with regard to the same gravitational field acting upon different material objects occurs because gravitation isn’t acting upon the matter as a whole, at a level where there exists some structural difference. Rather, gravitation is acting at the level of the individual fundamental constituents of matter, at the level of the primary distortion processes, at the level of the EMR-gravitation complex, where there’s no structural difference—i.e., where there’s structural equivalence. Specifically, gravitation is acting upon the individual electromagnetic components of the primary distortion processes that interact to compose a material object, increasing their degree of linearity of propagation. Regardless of how many primary distortion processes are interacting to compose a material object, gravitation is acting upon the electromagnetic component of each primary distortion process individually and equally, altering its direction of propagation in the same way, while also increasing its degree of linearity of propagation by the same amount. Gravitation doesn’t care whether the electromagnetic component of the primary distortion process it’s affecting is part of a large or a small material object, because it affects all electromagnetic components in the same way, to the same degree, resulting in gravitational acceleration that acts independent of the mass of the matter. So, whether a compound process is composed of two or two billion primary distortion processes—i.e., whether it has a small or a large mass—the change induced by the gravitationaldistortion gradient in the direction of propagation of each of the electromagnetic components is equivalent, resulting in the equivalence of acceleration for different masses in the same gravitational field. This is why Galileo so many years ago observed that different material objects fall to earth at the same rate. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 324 7.7 Gravitation’s functional (but not actual) curvature of space Although Einstein in his relativity theory treated the effect of gravitation upon space-time as an actual geometric curvature of the spatial structure, this subsection is intended to point out that the effect of gravitation is to create a functional, rather than actual, curvature of the spatial structure. That is, the consistent radial distribution of the gravitational distortion around matter, through its consistent effect upon the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic components of primary distortion processes, causes space to function as if it were curved in the area of a gravitational field, and thus creates the appearance that gravitation causes an actual bending or curvature of the spatial structure. The existence and effects of gravitation can be fully explained through the previously described mechanisms of gravitational attraction and acceleration, i.e., the consistent alteration of the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic components of primary distortion processes in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion. Within the context of the relational-matrix model, where gravitation is understood to represent a radially distributed and diminishing distortion of spatial content, there’s no need to introduce the concept of an actual curvature or bending of the spatial structure, because the effects of gravitation can be consistently accounted for without such a concept. To reiterate, gravitation causes space to function as if it were curved, relative to areas of space that don’t contain a strong gravitational field, but gravitation doesn’t actually curve or bend the spatial structure. Again, the dynamic structure of space is composed of relationships between reality cells. Those relationships don’t change, although they’re intrinsically dynamic. That is, as we have previously described, the relational matrix has a structural uniformity and consistency within the context of a continuous dynamic flux of spatial content. However, because gravitation is always radially distributed around matter in a gradient of decreasing distortion content, space functions as if it were curved, because electromagnetic radiation, or matter composed of electromagnetic radiation, traveling through such a gravitational gradient always has its direction of propagation altered toward the source of the gravitational field, and so it seems to be “bent” by that field. However, this “bending” isn’t the result of an actual curvature or bending of the spatial structure but is simply due to the consistent alteration of the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic components toward the source of the radially distributed gravitational distortion. Since the spatial structure can’t be experienced directly, it must be inferred through the way energy functions in space. So, when electromagnetic energy curves or bends in a gravitational field, space is then observed, through inference, to function as if it were structurally (i.e., geometrically) curved. An area of space that contains a strong gravitational field does indeed function as if it were curved, relative to other areas of space that don’t contain a strong gravitational field. However, it isn’t the spatial structure but the spatial content that’s curved, as it’s distributed in a radially diminishing pattern of distortion content around matter, as depicted in figure 50. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 325 matter Figure 50 The functional curvature of space that’s created by the radially diminishing distribution of the gravitational distortion around matter. (Left) There’s no external gravitational distortion encountered by the electromagnetic component (stippled circles) of a primary distortion process, and so it propagates through space linearly, with no bending or curvature in its path. (Note that the gravitational component of the primary distortion process is not shown.) (Right) Gravitational distortions of diminishing distortion content (progressively lighter shades of gray) are radially distributed around matter as denoted by the superimposition of the black circles of decreasing thickness. Note that these circles don’t represent curvatures of the spatial structure but represent curvatures of distortion content, as that distortion content is distributed in a radially diminishing pattern. In the figure on the right, the radially distributed gravitational-distortion gradient consistently alters the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic component (stippled circles) of the primary distortion process in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion. This alteration occurs as the gravitational distortion gradient causes the electromagnetic component to propagate into the next reality cell that’s not in linear progression. Since the electromagnetic component always propagates into the next adjacent reality cell that first reaches the level of maximal distortion, and since this level is always reached first by a reality cell that’s on the side of greater gravitational distortion, the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic component is consistently altered toward the source of the gravitational field. As shown here, this alteration of the direction of propagation decreases the degree of linearity of propagation of the electromagnetic component, “bending” its path to appear as if it were somehow traveling along curved or bent space. However, this nonlinearity or bending of the path of electromagnetic radiation by a gravitational field isn’t the result of the actual bending or curvature of the spatial structure but is simply due to the consistent alteration of the direction of propagation of the electromagnetic component toward the source of the radially distributed gravitational gradient. Thus, the apparent curvature that space is observed to have due to a gravitational field isn’t due to an actual curvature of the spatial structure but rather represents a radial distribution of distortion content, because the gravitational ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 326 distortion is always distributed in a radially diminishing pattern. When that pattern of distortion distribution is encountered by electromagnetic radiation, space then appears to function as if it were actually curved. To summarize, the consistency of the radial distribution of the gravitation distortion around matter consistently alters the direction of electromagnetic propagation, causing space around matter to function as if it were curved. This functional curvature is the result of the radially diminishing distribution of the gravitational distortion, not the result of an actual bending or alteration of the relationships between the reality cells that compose the spatial structure. This functional curvature, this consistent alteration of the direction of electromagnetic propagation, is the same mechanism through which gravitation functions to create interactive-process stability, and so it’s the same mechanism by which compound processes are created and sustained. Thus, Einstein’s treatment of gravitation as a geometric curvature of the spatial structure works because it’s functionally correct. That is, Einstein’s equations describing gravitation as a geometric curvature of space-time work because they correctly describe the functional reality, although they don’t describe the actual underlying reality. Since we’re here concerned with developing a unified model of space-time that can consistently show how the spatial structure relates to how physical reality is observed to function as an extension of that structure, we needed to point out how the apparent curvature of space around matter can be accounted for within the context of the relational-matrix model, within the context of an underlying reality that has no actual curvature of spatial structure but only a radially diminishing distribution of distortion content. Conceptual checkpoint I-9 -Because compound processes are formed through the stable and repetitive interaction of primary distortion processes, compound processes can be defined in terms of their periodicity. -A compound-process period refers to one cycle of distortion-process interaction, in which the primary distortion processes that make up the compound process return to an identical point in their relationship. -Once a compound process exists, it may be possible for it to stably and repetitively interact with other distortion processes, thereby forming higher-order compound processes. -Although the propagation of primary distortion processes through the relational matrix always occurs at the speed of light, when those primary distortion processes make up a compound process, they propagate relatively nonlinearly, resulting in the compound process as a whole traveling through space at less than the speed of light. -Material velocity is directly related to the degree of linearity of propagation of the electromagnetic components that compose the matter. With increasing linearity of componentprocess propagation, the velocity of matter approaches the speed of light. With decreasing ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 327 linearity of component-process propagation, the velocity of matter becomes incrementally less than the speed of light. -Matter as such (i.e., as the stable repetitive interaction of primary distortion processes) can’t travel through space at the speed of light because to do so would require a complete linearity of component-process propagation, which would then preclude the nonlinear interactions that are necessary for those interacting distortion processes to exist as matter in the first place. -Because compound processes travel through space at less than the speed of light, the gravitational components of the primary distortion processes, which propagate radially at the speed of light, are able to propagate out ahead or in front of the twisting electromagnetic components, thereby creating a radially distributed gravitation-distortion gradient around the compound process, resulting in the consistent association of matter with a surrounding gravitational field. -Owing to the increase in distortion content where there’s an overlap or convergence of distortions, higher-order compound processes—i.e., matter composed of relatively more numerous primary distortion processes—will radiate a relatively stronger gravitational field. -The attractive nature of the gravitational force is the result of the fact that the electromagnetic components of primary distortion processes always propagate in the direction of increasing gravitational distortion. -The acceleration of matter caused by gravitation is the result of the incremental increase in the degree of linearity of propagation of matter’s component processes that occurs in a gravitational field. -All matter is accelerated to the same degree in the same gravitational field, such as that of the Earth, because gravitation acts at the level of the individual components of matter, causing their patterns of distortion propagation to become more linear to the same degree, thereby causing the gravitational effect upon matter to be equivalent, regardless of how many distortion processes are interacting to form the matter. -Gravitational fields don’t represent an actual distortion (i.e., bending or curvature) of the spatial structure but cause space to function as if it were curved, owing to the consistent effect that the radially diminishing distribution of the gravitational distortion has upon the direction of electromagnetic propagation. Section 8 Time and the Relational Matrix According to Einstein’s relativity theory, the temporal existence of a material object is related to its velocity.22 In other words, time isn’t invariant, isn’t a constant process, but is somehow 22 Einstein developed two distinct theories of relativity: the special theory of relativity, proposed in 1905, and the general theory of relativity, proposed in 1916. The special theory of relativity is concerned primarily with the relativity of time and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 328 linked to how fast matter is moving through space. The temporal aspect of relativity theory holds that time slows down for an object as its velocity increases, and that time speeds up for an object as its velocity decreases. Our discussion of compound processes within the context of the relational-matrix model is, in effect, a discussion of the dynamic structure of matter in relation to the dynamic structure of space. In this section, we will examine how the variation in the patterns of distortion-process interaction that must accompany any alteration in material velocity accounts for the relativity of time as a function of material velocity. In demonstrating how time exists as a function of the dynamic structure of matter in relation to the dynamic structure of space, the simplicity of the unnecessarily abstract concept of time will be revealed. 8.1 Time is a measurement, not what is being measured Time has remained a highly abstract concept, one that we have trouble grasping, because we haven’t known what it is that time measures. As a consequence, time, which we will show to be a measurement, has been mistaken for what’s being measured. It’s as if we knew of an inch but didn’t know what an inch measured. In this case, the inch itself then would become the reality, rather than the spatial measurement of reality. This is what has occurred with the concept of time. Time measures a certain aspect of reality— i.e., its dynamic aspect— but because we’ve been unaware of that dynamic aspect of reality (because we’ve been unaware of the dynamic structure of space), we’ve been unaware of what time measures. For this reason, time itself has come to be mistakenly thought of as the dynamic aspect of reality, when in fact it’s a measure of the dynamic aspect of reality. Once we understand what time measures, the nature of time will be much less abstract and mysterious—in fact, the nature of time will become downright obvious. An inch is a unit of measure, and an hour is also a unit of measure. Both of these units, the inch and the hour, are conceptual abstractions that have no correlate in reality: they are reference points we’ve established to give measurements meaning. The inch allows us to measure spatial distance or structural dimensions. The hour allows us to measure something, and that something is expressed in units of what we call time. Most people would say the hour allows us to measure time, but this is where we make our mistake. Time is a measurement, not what’s being measured. However, because we’re unaware of what time is actually a measurement of, we equate the form of the measurement with what’s being measured, and in so doing we grant time an objective existence that it doesn’t deserve. A ruler allows us to measure spatial distance in terms of units of length. Because we can see what the ruler measures, i.e., units of length, we don’t confuse the measurement—for example, the inch—for what’s being measured, i.e., spatial distance. A clock allows us to measure something in terms of units of time. The clock doesn’t actually measure time; rather, time is mass as a function of material velocity, whereas the general theory of relativity was developed to explain apparent conflicts between the laws of relativity and gravitation. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 329 itself the measurement of something else. However, because we don’t see or know directly what time measures, we confuse the form of the measurement for what’s being measured. You wouldn’t say, “I’m going to measure an inch,” because you know that the inch is itself the measurement, and what you’re measuring is spatial distance. But when we say, “I’m going to measure the time it takes,” what is it we’re really measuring that we then express in units of time? To answer this question, let’s examine a clock, the old kind with hands on it. It’s simply a circle divided into sectors. A ruler, yardstick, or meterstick is a straight line divided into segments. A ruler is used to measure spatial distance or structural dimensions—the distance from here to there—and so it’s linear. A clock is used to measure temporal change or dynamic activity, and since the dynamic activity that time measures occurs in repetitive cycles or periods, the clock is circular,23 as depicted in figure 51. a b measure of structural relationship measure of dynamic relationship Figure 51 Spatial distance or structural dimensions are measured in terms of units of length—inches, meters, etc. Since spatial distance is measured between two points, a and b, the measuring device is a segmented line, as in a ruler or meterstick, as depicted on the left. Temporal change or dynamic activity is measured in terms of units of time—hours, minutes, seconds, etc. Since dynamic activity occurs in repetitive cycles or periods, the measuring device is a sectored circle, as depicted on the right. We don’t measure inches; we measure spatial distance or structural dimensions, using the inch as a unit of measure. In the same way, we don’t measure hours; we measure temporal change or dynamic activity, using the hour as a unit of measure. The ruler is a structural measuring device, and the clock is a dynamic measuring device. In the case of a ruler, the structural existence of an object is referenced to the structural existence of the ruler, and that measurement is expressed in units of length. In the case of a clock, the dynamic existence of an object is referenced to the dynamic existence of the clock, and that measurement is expressed in units of time. Thus, if both of the spheres that orbit the central sphere in the diagram on the right are moving at the same 23 Even modern digital clocks are circular; however, they display only one point in the cycle at any given moment. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 330 velocity, then the sphere closer to the central sphere completes a cycle or period sooner, i.e., in less time, time being a measure of the varying dynamic or periodicity of matter. What we will demonstrate in this section is that time is a measure of the varying dynamic or periodicity of compound processes—i.e., matter or material objects—no more, no less. Length is a measure of spatial structure; time is a measure of material dynamic. As the periodicity intrinsic to matter varies, so the measurement of time also varies. The periodicity of matter varies as a function of material velocity, and so the measurement of time also varies as a function of material velocity. That is the basis of temporal relativity, in a nutshell. Space is a dynamic structure. Compound processes—i.e., matter or material objects—extend as another level of relationship from the dynamic structure of space, and so compound processes possess both structural and dynamic aspects that are inseparable from the dynamic structure of space. The dynamic aspect of compound processes is expressed in terms of the compoundprocess period, which we have previously defined in subsection 7.1. However, whereas the dynamic structure of space is invariant, the dynamic structure of matter varies. This variation in the dynamic structure of matter is what’s responsible for the relativity of time and mass as a function of material velocity. Variations in the structural aspects of matter are measured in terms length, whereas variations in the dynamic aspect of matter measured in terms of cycles or periods—i.e., in terms of time. Because the structural and dynamic aspects of matter are coexistent, one aspect can’t be altered without altering the other. Material velocity can’t be altered without altering the interactive material structure. The interactive material structure can’t be altered without altering the material dynamic or periodicity. Therefore, when material velocity is altered, material dynamic or periodicity is also altered, and so time, as a measure of material dynamic or periodicity, is also altered. This interdependence of material structure and dynamic is the basis of both temporal and mass relativity. 8.2 Time as a clockwork mechanism In this subsection, we will examine in more detail how variations in the periodicity of compound processes are measurable in terms of time. We will also discuss the relationship between what’s being measured as time, and the dynamic aspect of the relational structure of space-time, which dynamic aspect manifests as the speed-of-light constant. Time is a measurement that’s derived from the mechanical interactions going on within compound processes (i.e., matter or material objects). The dynamic structure of space, along with the primary and compound distortion processes that exist as extensions of that dynamic structure, function like a clockwork mechanism—i.e., as an interconnected framework of interlocking wheels or gears. The turning of those gears is what’s ultimately responsible for the movement of the hands of any clock, which observed movement we call the measurement of time, as depicted in figure 52. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 331 Legend invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure a b invariant spatial structure and dynamic c primary distortion process: energy (invariant structure and dynamic) d compound distortion process: matter (varying structure and dynamic) varying material dynamic or periodicity measure of varying material dynamic (i.e., time) Figure 52 The unbreakable linkage between the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure and the varying material dynamic or periodicity, as manifested in the movement of the hands of a clock, which we observe as the measurement of time. Ultimately, this diagram also depicts how time exists simply as a relative measure of material dynamic or periodicity, and shows how that material dynamic or periodicity is driven by the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure. The cluster of seven small circles represents the invariant spatial structure and dynamic. The small stippled circles (a) represent primary distortion processes, which have the same invariant structure and dynamic as the spatial structure itself, represented by the curved vector within the small circles. The larger stippled circles (b, c, d) represent increasingly higher-order compound processes, all of which are composed of interacting primary distortion processes. However, in contrast to the invariant dynamic of the primary distortion processes whose stable repetitive interactions compose them, the compound processes have a varying dynamic, or, more specifically, a varying periodicity, which depends on the pattern of interaction of the component processes. That varying periodicity of the compound processes is represented by the curved vectors which make up the periphery of the larger stippled circles. This diagram is set up as a clockwork mechanism, to show how the movement of the hands of a clock, which movement we call the passage of time, is accomplished through spatial, energetic, and material relationships that function in a way which is directly analogous to the way mechanical gears turn to move the hands of a clock. This spatial “clock” doesn’t need to be wound because its energy, its dynamic, is intrinsic to its structure. The primary distortion processes are the primary gears, driven by the invariant spatial structure and dynamic. Matter, or material objects, represent secondary, tertiary, quaternary, etc., gears. The pattern of primarydistortion-process interaction is what determines the periodicity of the secondary, tertiary, quaternary, etc., gears—i.e., what determines how fast they turn. The turning of the material ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 332 gears, i.e., their periodicity, is what determines the rate at which the final gear turns (small black dot at center), to which final gear is attached a stick. The movement of this stick is what we observe as the passage of time, which is nothing more than the measure of the varying dynamic or periodicity of the matter that composes the clock. Nothing abstract, nothing mysterious—just the result of a simple mechanical interaction driven basically by the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure from which matter extends. Temporal relativity exists because, although the movement of the hands of a clock is ultimately driven by the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure, this movement is a material dynamic, and so it will vary, depending on the periodicity of the compound processes, the gears, to which the hands are connected and which exist between those hands and the primary gear, i.e., the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure. For example, if the velocity of compound process d were to increase, its periodicity would decrease (because the interactions between primary distortion processes would have to become relatively more linear), and the movement of the hands of the clock would slow down, correlating to a relative expansion or dilation of time for that accelerated process. Conversely, if the velocity of compound process d were to decrease, its periodicity would increase (because the interactions between primary distortion processes would have to become relatively less linear), and the movement of the hands of the clock would speed up, correlating to a relative contraction or shrinking of time for that decelerated process. Whereas the movement of the hands of any clock measures the varying dynamic or periodicity of compound processes, that movement is ultimately driven by, and so remains unbreakably linked to, the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure, with that linkage manifested as the rate of passage of time for an object existing relative to, or as a function of, that object’s velocity as a percentage of the speed-of-light constant. Without knowledge of the dynamic structure of space, we can’t know the basis of the measure we call time. Without knowledge of the dynamic structure of space and its connection to the dynamic structure of matter, the movement of the hands of a clock is mysterious and unknown, and time itself is mysterious and unknown. This situation has resulted in a general confusion regarding the nature of time, wherein time has itself become thought of as an object, rather than as the measure of the dynamic structure of an object. It’s as if we knew of fish but knew nothing of water or the ocean. Within that context, all kinds of theories to explain the nature of fish would be developed. Once we came to the ocean, however, and saw the fish within the context of their environment, the nature of fish as creatures existing in relation to the ocean would become obvious, eliminating the need for the previously established theories developed when the fish were known only in relation to the unknown. Likewise, once the dynamic structure of space is known, we can see the connection between the dynamic aspect of space and the movement of the hands of a clock, and within that context, the nature of time is no longer mysterious and unknown. Rather, within that context, the nature of time becomes knowable as nothing more than the measure of the periodicity intrinsic to the dynamic structure of matter, periodicity that must vary as the velocity of matter varies. Since the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 333 connection between time and the dynamic structure of space can be demonstrated, there’s no need to conceive of time as an abstract and unknowable “fourth dimension.” Within the context of the relational-matrix model, time can be seen as the measure of a variable dynamic that itself extends from the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure. Time isn’t a place to be; it’s not an object but a measurement. 8.3 Temporal relativity and the interactive material structure Once the nature of time is understood, temporal relativity also becomes much less difficult to understand. Understanding temporal relativity involves nothing more than understanding why any change in material velocity must be accompanied by changes in material periodicity, along with the understanding of how that material periodicity is directly related to the movement of the hands of a clock, i.e., to the rate of the repetitive cycles or periods displayed by the clock. Referring back to figures 47 and 49, we can see that for an individual compound process, as the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes increases, the compound process as a whole travels through the relational matrix at a higher velocity, and also has relatively fewer periods of content exchange, than if it were traveling at a lower velocity (i.e., with less linearity of component process propagation) through the relational matrix. Thus, a compound process traveling at a higher velocity has relatively less periodicity and so the movement of the hands of a clock connected to that compound process would be slower, thus expanding or dilating the passage or measure of time as it exists for a faster-moving object. The relationships between compound-process velocity, compound-process periodicity, degree of linearity of propagation of component processes, and relativity of temporal frame are summarized in figure 53. Time as a Function of Compound-Process Velocity contraction of time increasing compound-process periodicity decreasing compound-process velocity increasing compound-process velocity decreasing compound-process periodicity expansion of time 100 50 60 66.7 70 76.7 100 velocity as % of the speed of light ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 334 Figure 53 The relationship between compound-process velocity, compound-process periodicity, degree of linearity of propagation of component processes, and relativity of temporal frame. Depicted here is a compound process composed of two interacting electromagnetic components (two different shades of stippling), which can be seen either as accelerating as it propagates to the right, or, in reverse, as decelerating as it propagates to the left. (Bottom) As the velocity of a compound process (i.e., matter) increases from left to right, the degree of linearity of propagation of the primary distortion processes that compose it increases, thereby decreasing the periodicity of the compound process as a whole, thereby decreasing the rate of passage of time that exists as a function of, and so as a measure of, its material periodicity. (Top) As the velocity of a compound process (i.e., matter) decreases from right to left, the degree of linearity of propagation of the primary distortion processes that compose it decreases, thereby increasing the periodicity of the compound process as a whole, thereby increasing the rate of passage of time that exists as a function of, and so as a measure of, its material periodicity. Our understanding of the relationships depicted in figure 53 hinges upon our understanding that the electromagnetic components of the primary distortion processes, which stably and repetitively interact to compose matter, always propagate at the speed of light—no more, no less. Therefore, the only way to change material velocity is to change the degree of linearity of propagation of matter’s component processes. Any change in the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes also changes the interactive structure of the compound process as a whole, and this change in interactive structure then exists as a change in the periodicity intrinsic to the compound process as a whole, which then is observed or measured as a change in the rate of passage of time expressed by that compound process (as depicted in figure 52). Thus, time is relative because time is a measure and, thus, a function of the varying dynamic or periodicity of matter. Therefore, the relational-matrix model is consistent with the temporal aspect of relativity theory, which holds that the rate of passage of time for an object decreases as its velocity increases, while, conversely, the rate of passage of time for an object increases as its velocity decreases. The relational-matrix model also provides us with a straightforward explanation of why temporal relativity exists, one that’s directly linked to the dynamic structure of space and, more specifically, one that shows the unbreakable linkage of time itself to the dynamic aspect of the spatial structure. The measure of time exists relative to, or as a function of, material velocity as a percentage of the speed-of-light constant because all material dynamic or periodicity ultimately extends from the dynamic intrinsic to energy processes. Because the dynamic intrinsic to energy processes is itself ultimately an extension of the invariant spatial dynamic, which manifests as the speed-of-light constant (i.e., the rate-of-penetration constant), what we measure as time is unbreakably linked to that invariant spatial dynamic, with that linkage manifesting in the form of time existing in relation to, or as a function of, material velocity as a percentage of the speed-of-light constant. Putting it another way, because all the gears of any clock are ultimately driven by the invariant spatial dynamic, the movement of the hands of any clock also is unbreakably linked to that ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 335 invariant spatial dynamic. This unbreakable linkage between the varying periodicity of the clock and the invariant spatial dynamic which ultimately drives that clock is the reason why the measure of time exists relative to, or as a function of, material velocity as a percentage of the speed-of-light constant. Space doesn’t have a fourth dimension that’s time; rather, three-dimensional space has an intrinsic dynamic aspect. That intrinsic and invariant dynamic aspect drives the varying dynamic or periodicity of the compound processes which exist as extensions of space’s dynamic structure. Time is simply how that varying dynamic or periodicity manifests materially and so becomes measurable. The relativity of time is a result of the alteration of material dynamic or periodicity that must occur for material velocity to change. As material velocity changes, along with this alteration of material dynamic or periodicity there must also occur an alteration of interactive material structure, i.e., an alteration of the spatial relationships that exist between the component processes which make up matter, as depicted in figures 47, 49, and 53. In the next section we will examine the spatial relationships that exist between component processes which make up matter, and we will relate those spatial relationships to the measure of matter’s mass, as well as to the property of matter called inertia. Once we have described mass and inertia within the context of the relational-matrix model, we will then be in a position to examine how the alteration of the interactive material structure that must accompany changes in material velocity is also responsible for the relativity of mass. Conceptual checkpoint I-10 -Time isn’t itself the dynamic aspect of reality, but rather is the measure of the dynamic aspect of reality—specifically, of the dynamic structure of matter, i.e., the variable dynamic or periodicity of matter, which itself exists as a function of the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure. -Material velocity is a function of the pattern of interaction of the primary distortion processes that compose matter. That pattern of interaction can become more or less linear, respectively increasing or decreasing material velocity. -Material dynamic or periodicity is also a function of the pattern of interaction of the primary distortion processes that compose matter. Therefore, any change in material velocity must be accompanied by an alteration of material dynamic or periodicity, resulting, then, in a change in the rate of passage of time which exists as a measure of that material periodicity. This is the basis of temporal relativity. -The invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure drives all energy processes and material periodicity. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 336 -The invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure has been defined as the rate-ofpenetration constant, which has been shown to manifest as the speed-of-light constant. -The measure of time exists relative to, or as a function of, material velocity as a percentage of the speed-of-light constant. This unbreakable linkage between the rate of passage of time, material velocity, and the speed-of-light constant exists because the variable dynamic or periodicity of matter, which time measures, is inseparably linked to the invariant dynamic intrinsic to the spatial structure, by virtue of the fact that compound processes exist as extensions of the dynamic spatial structure. Section 9 Mass, Inertia, and the Relational Matrix In the preceding section, we described how changes in material velocity are accompanied by alterations of material dynamic or periodicity. As we pointed out, an alteration in material dynamic or periodicity represents an alteration of interactive material structure as well. In this section, the alteration of interactive material structure that must accompany changes in material velocity will be related to the relativity of mass and the concept of inertia. More specifically, in this section we will discuss the following topics: (1) the nature of inertia and mass within the context of the relational-matrix model; (2) the underlying unity of the gravitational and inertial forces; and (3) why mass, like time, exists relative to material velocity. First, we will review the concepts of mass and inertia. 9.1 Background mass (mas) n. 8. Physics: the quantity of matter as determined from its weight or from Newton's second law of motion. Abbr.: m. Cf. weight (def. 2), relativistic mass, rest mass.24 in•er•tia (in ûr‚shƒ, i nûr‚-) n. 2. Physics a. the property of matter by which it retains its state of rest or its velocity along a straight line so long as it isn’t acted upon by an external force.25 Mass, in physics, is the amount of matter that an object contains. Mass is a measure of the inertial property of an object, that is, of its resistance to change of motion. Mass is different from weight, weight being a measure of the attraction of the Earth for a given mass. Gravitational mass and inertial mass are identical. Although weight is proportional to mass, weight varies with the position of a given mass relative to the Earth. For this reason, equal masses that have the same location in relation to a gravitational field will have equal weights. Einstein’s theory of relativity altered the traditional concept of mass as being invariant for a given object. In modern physics, the mass of an object is understood to be a quantity that changes as the velocity of that object changes, relative to the speed of light. 24 25 Random House Dictionary, 2nd ed cd-rom version Random House Dictionary, 2nd ed cd-rom version ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 337 Inertia is the property of matter that causes it to resist any change of its motion in either direction or speed. This property is described by Sir Isaac Newton’s first law of motion: An object at rest tends to remain at rest, and an object in motion tends to continue in motion in a straight line, unless either is acted upon by an outside force. Inertia is generally related to mass. A greater force is needed to accelerate a large rock than is needed to accelerate a small pebble. This relationship is expressed by Newton's second law of motion: force = mass × acceleration. Mass, however, is usually measured by its gravitational property, i.e., the attractive force it exerts on other masses. That both the inertial force and gravitational force are directly proportional to mass was first realized and demonstrated by Galileo Galilei in about 1590. According to Galileo, a heavy weight and a light weight dropped simultaneously from the top of a tower must both strike the ground simultaneously. Einstein theorized that the gravitational and inertial forces are identical and that it is impossible to distinguish between them. This equivalence between the gravitational and inertial forces is the basis of Einstein's theory of general relativity. Although the theory of general relativity hasn’t been fully accepted, the few experiments that scientists have been able to conduct to test the theory have, so far, tended to confirm the theory. Having reviewed the concepts of mass and inertia, we will now show how these concepts fit into the relational-matrix model. 9.2 Inertia and the relational matrix Compound processes (i.e., matter) are composed of interacting primary distortion processes. These primary distortion processes have both a linear (electromagnetic) and a radial (gravitational) component. Matter exists when the linear components of primary distortion processes interact stably and repetitively with each other. The radial gravitational distortion associated with each linear electromagnetic component is what causes these linear components to twist around or orbit each other, each simultaneously altering the other’s direction of propagation, each binding the other into a position that then, through feedback, binds itself. Let’s look at the situation of a compound process of the first order, consisting of two interacting primary distortion processes, as its velocity increases or decreases. To change the velocity of a compound process as a whole, the pattern of interaction of the component processes making up the compound process (i.e., matter) must change so that each primary distortion process can propagate more or less linearly, yet still stably and repetitively interact. What we will show is that inertia is simply the difficulty in changing the pattern of interaction of the component processes and that the change in their pattern of interaction causes the change in mass that must accompany a change in material velocity. The stable repetitive interaction between two primary distortion processes is mediated by the gravitational distortion. For the velocity of the compound process as a whole to increase or decrease, this stable repetitive interaction must be altered. However, this stable repetitive interaction is resistant to change because the pattern of propagation of each primary distortion ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 338 process continuously reinforces the pattern of propagation of the other and, through feedback, then continuously reinforces its own pattern of propagation. This situation has been defined as interactive-process stability, and the compound process (i.e., matter) that exists as a result of this situation has been likened to the pattern integrity that is created by tying a rope into an overhand knot. Inertia is simply the difficulty in changing the self-binding and mutually reinforcing pattern of primary-distortion-process interaction. In other words, inertia is essentially the manifestation and result of interactive-process stability. The self-binding and mutually reinforcing pattern of primary-distortion-process interaction is what tends to keep compound processes traveling at the same velocity in the same direction. Putting it another way, matter tends to travel through spacetime at the same velocity in the same direction because its internal structure is mutually reinforcing. That mutual reinforcement of material structure, caused or mediated by the gravitational distortion, is what we perceive as inertia. Inertia, then, which is the property of matter that causes it to resist any change in either velocity or direction, is defined, within the context of the relational-matrix model, as the resistance of matter to any change in the self-binding and mutually reinforcing relationships between the component processes that make up matter. The patterns of propagation of all the primary distortion processes that are stably and repetitively interacting to form a material object are interconnected, since each pattern of propagation helps to create the environment that causes the patterns of propagation of all the others, and, through feedback, also helps to cause its own pattern of propagation. Therefore, because of interactiveprocess stability, because of this interconnection between primary distortion processes that are stably and repetitively interacting to form a material object, the pattern of propagation of even a single one of those primary distortion processes can’t be changed without a concomitant change in the patterns of propagation of all the other primary distortion processes to which that one primary distortion process is connected. Thus, overcoming inertia means overcoming all of these self-binding and mutually reinforcing patterns of propagation simultaneously. The more primary distortion processes that are stably and repetitively interacting to compose a material object, the greater the number of these selfbinding and mutually reinforcing patterns of propagation there are that must be overcome, and thus the greater the inertia of that matter. As we shall see, the mass of matter is directly proportional to the number of primary distortion processes that are stably and repetitively interacting to compose it. This is why, in general, larger masses have greater inertia, because they have more self-binding and mutually reinforcing patterns of distortion-process interaction that must be overcome for the velocity or direction of the compound process as a whole to be altered. Having examined the concept of inertia within the context of the relational-matrix model, we are now in a position to examine and understand why Einstein was once again correct when he proposed in his general relativity theory that the gravitational and inertial forces are identical. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 339 9.3 The basis of gravitational and inertial equivalence To understand the singular identity or unity of the gravitational and inertial forces, we must first examine the differences in the effects these two forces have upon matter. The inertial force keeps matter moving at the same velocity in the same direction, whereas the gravitational force causes matter to change its velocity and direction. So, the inertial force is the force of stability, and the gravitational force is the force of change. Therefore, according to Einstein and our own observation, the force that stabilizes the motion of matter, and the force that changes the motion of matter, are identical. But how can the same identical force exert apparently opposite effects upon matter? Putting it another way, how can two seemingly different forces that affect matter in opposite ways actually be the same identical force? Because how matter is affected depends on how it is approached. As shown in figure 54, the gravitational gradient, acting upon matter from the outside in, is what changes matter’s velocity and direction; whereas the gravitational gradient, acting upon matter from the inside out, is what stabilizes matter’s velocity and direction. Thus, both gravitation and inertia are a function of the radial component of the linear/radial distortion complex, i.e., a function of the gravitational component of the EMR-gravitation complex. gravitational field inertial field The Unity of the Gravitational and Inertial Forces Figure 54 The unity of the gravitational and inertial forces, depicting both of those forces as the same identical force, i.e., as the gravitational distortion, acting upon matter (a compound process) from opposite orientations: from within, as inertia, and from without, as gravitation. Here, two primary distortion processes (black and stippled circles) are stably and repetitively interacting to form a compound process (i.e., matter), defined by the dotted white line. As in all compound processes, the electromagnetic components twist around or orbit one another, each bound into that pattern of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 340 propagation by the other’s gravitational component (gray areas). The gravitational distortion, acting from within the matter to stabilize its dynamic structure, is observed as the force of inertia (shown here as the inertial field). Also, as the electromagnetic components twist around or orbit one another, the compound process becomes surrounded by a radially dissipating gravitational distortion gradient—i.e., by a gravitational field. The gravitational distortion that exists outside the matter is able to attract other matter, and is observed as the attractive force of gravitation. As depicted here, the forces of inertia and gravitation are both manifestations of the gravitational component of the EMR-gravitation complex, as that gravitational component exists, respectively, internal to and external to the compound process. There’s really no definite boundary where one force stops and the other starts; there’s only a continuum of distorted of spatial content. Thus, the difference between what we observe as the gravitational effect upon matter and what we observe as the inertial effect upon matter is simply in the orientation or direction of the gravitational distortion relative to the compound process it’s acting upon. Acting from within, the gravitational distortion stabilizes the dynamic structure of matter, functioning then as the force of inertia. Acting from without, the gravitational distortion is attractive to other energy and matter, functioning then as the force of gravitation. We could then say that inertia is actually “internally applied gravitation” or, conversely, that gravitation is actually “externally applied inertia.” Thus, the same force can act upon matter in opposite orientations, from opposite directions, to produce an observationally opposite effect upon matter. That is, the force that changes the dynamic state of matter (gravitation), and the force that stabilizes the dynamic state of matter (inertia), are the same force, with the difference being in the direction from which that force is acting upon the matter. That is, if a gravitational distortion originating from outside the matter acts upon other matter, it acts as a gravitational field, as a force of change. However, if a gravitational distortion originating from inside the matter acts upon the matter, it acts as an inertial field, as a force of stability. Same force, different effects. In other words, in-ertia is gravitation, as that force is applied from with-in matter, rather than from with-out. If mass A is drawn toward a larger mass B, this change in its motion is caused by the force of gravitation. In this case, the gravitational distortion is acting upon mass A from outside mass A, originating from mass B. Conversely, if we try to move a heavy object horizontally, we are resisted in our efforts by the force of inertia. In this case, the gravitational distortion that’s acting upon the matter to stabilize its velocity and direction originates from within the matter itself. In both cases, that of change (gravitational force) and that of the resistance to change (inertial force), the same identical force—i.e., the radially propagating gravitational distortion—is what causes these opposite effects. For an externally applied gravitational field to change the motion of matter, it must ultimately act within the matter, changing the internal gravitational environment of the matter. Once the matter’s internal gravitational environment has been changed, thereby altering the stable repetitive pattern of primary-distortion-process interaction, that alteration is self-sustaining because it represents a new self-binding and mutually reinforcing relationship between the component processes that make up the matter. It takes nothing to keep matter going at the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 341 velocity and in the direction it’s already going, because that velocity and direction are intrinsic to the dynamic structure of matter itself. Changing the motion of matter means changing the pattern of component-process interaction. Such a change requires that the internal gravitational environment which currently sustains the matter must itself change. If the internal gravitational environment remains the same, there’s no reason for the motion of the matter not to remain the same, i.e., for the matter to keep going at the same velocity in the same direction. Since the gravitational distortion is what binds the electromagnetic components of a compound process into the stable repetitive pattern of interaction that is matter, an alteration of the internal gravitational environment is then what’s necessary to change that pattern of component-process interaction, thereby increasing or decreasing the velocity of the matter. The gravitational force, as it’s applied from outside matter, causes an acceleration or deceleration of the matter by altering the degree of linearity of propagation of the primary distortion processes that are stably and repetitively interacting to compose that matter. Once the degree of linearity of propagation of the primary distortion processes is altered, establishing a new pattern of component-process interaction, the external gravitational field can be withdrawn, and the compound process as a whole will continue to travel at its new velocity. An “applied from the outside” gravitational force is needed to alter the pattern of component-process interaction, because it’s needed to overcome the “applied from the inside” inertial force. The “applied from the outside” gravitational force is needed to change the internal gravitational environment (i.e., the inertial field) that’s binding and sustaining the matter in its current velocity and direction. However, that externally applied gravitational field isn’t needed to maintain a pattern of component-process interaction once such a pattern of component-process interaction is established. That is, once an externally applied gravitational field has altered the motion of matter, that external field isn’t needed to sustain the matter in its new velocity and direction. For, once established, any pattern of component-process interaction is self-binding and selfsustaining, since any pattern of component-process interaction must be one that’s supported and reinforced by the gravitational distortions associated with the primary distortion processes themselves. That is, primary distortion processes can’t be forced into a new pattern of interaction by an externally applied gravitational field unless such a pattern of interaction is one that’s allowed and subsequently reinforced by their own associated gravitational distortions. The concept presented in the preceding paragraph requires further elaboration. Let’s say that we impose, from the outside, a gravitational field upon an object, increasing its velocity. Let’s say that we then withdraw that field. The object will continue to travel at its new velocity. Why doesn’t the object revert back to the velocity it had before the external application of the gravitational field, since the external gravitational environment has been restored to its previous state? Because the external application of the gravitational field has, by altering the self-binding and mutually reinforcing relationships of the component processes making up the matter, caused a persistent change in the internal gravitational environment (i.e., the inertial field) that now sustains the new pattern of component-process interaction. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 342 Once the external gravitational field is removed, the velocity of the compound process will stop increasing—i.e., the matter will stop accelerating. However, now the compound process as a whole will continue on at the new velocity determined by the new pattern of component process interaction that was induced by the externally applied gravitational field. The compound process doesn’t revert back to its old velocity (or pattern of component-process interaction) because the new pattern of component-process interaction is self-binding and self-sustaining. It takes the application of an external gravitational field to the compound process to change the internal gravitational environment that sustains the pattern of component-process interaction, but once a new pattern of component-process interaction is established, it’s sustained by the new internal gravitational environment (i.e., the inertial field). To summarize, the gravitational and inertial forces are the same identical force because they represent the same fundamental reality, i.e., the radial component of the linear/radial distortion complex, as it acts upon matter from complementary directions—i.e., from within as the stabilizing inertial force, and from without as the accelerating or decelerating gravitational force. It’s the same force, the same field, the same distortion of spatial content, with the difference being in whether it’s applied from inside or outside the compound process (i.e., matter). Applied from without, the gravitational field alters the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes, resulting in acceleration or deceleration of the compound process. Applied from within, existing as the inertial field, the gravitational distortion is the force that stabilizes and reinforces, through interactive-process stability, whatever pattern of component-process interaction currently exists, resulting in a constant velocity and direction for the compound process as a whole. 9.4 Mass, the relativity of mass, and the relational matrix Until now in this work, compound processes have been referred to as “matter”, rather than as “mass”. To some degree, the term mass is synonymous with the term matter, yet they aren’t precisely the same thing. All matter has mass, but the mass of the matter depends on the material velocity. This relativity of mass is part of Einstein’s general relativity theory. In this article, matter is used as a more general term, referring to the compound processes formed through the stable repetitive interaction of primary distortion processes. In this subsection, the particular attribute of compound processes that’s responsible for the mass associated with matter will be described—as always, within the context of the relational-matrix model—as in some way related to material velocity. Mass is defined as representing both the amount of matter that an object contains, and the inertial property of that object. The concept of inertia has already been related to the gravitational distortion. Therefore, we will describe mass as a reflection of the strength or size of the gravitational distortion associated with a compound process. As already described, the greater the distortion content of the radially distributed gravitational distortion surrounding the electromagnetic components of a compound process, the greater its associated gravitational distortion, both externally as a gravitational field and internally as an inertial field. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 343 The strength or size of the gravitational distortion associated with a compound process is based on two factors: (1) the number of primary distortion processes interacting to form the compound process (i.e., matter), and (2) the degree of linearity of propagation of the component processes making up the compound process—i.e., the material velocity. We will now examine both of these factors to see how each contributes to the mass associated with matter. It’s fairly easy to understand why the gravitational distortion and, thus, mass would increase with an increasing number of component processes. As primary distortion processes twist around or orbit each other to form a compound process, their gravitational components overlap additively, and so increase the distortion content in the area where they overlap. Therefore, as more primary distortion processes interact to compose the matter, there’s increasing overlap of the gravitational distortions, creating a larger total associated gravitational distortion, as depicted in figure 55. + = Figure 55 The mass of the matter is most obviously and directly related to the number of primary distortion processes that are stably and repetitively interacting to compose the compound process as a whole. The two drawings to the left show two linearly propagating primary distortion processes (black and stippled circles). As those two primary distortion processes stably and repetitively interact to form a compound process or matter, the gravitational distortions (gray areas) associated with each component process additively overlap, creating a relatively greater gravitational distortion, both internal and external to the compound process. The more primary distortion processes interact to compose the matter, the greater is the additive overlap of the gravitational distortions, internally increasing the inertial field and externally increasing the gravitational field, resulting in the measurement of a larger mass for the material object, since mass is a measure of the inertial property of matter. However, since mass varies with material velocity, mass must represent more than just the simple summation of the gravitational distortions associated with the component processes. We have established that the mass which matter is measured to have is a function of the gravitational distortion associated with that matter, as that gravitational distortion functions external to the mass as a gravitational field and internal to the mass as an inertial field. Since a change in material velocity doesn’t alter the number of component processes making up matter, the total gravitational distortion associated with matter can’t be equivalent to the simple summation of the gravitational components, because mass is relative, varying with material ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 344 velocity. For this reason, the total gravitational distortion associated with matter is directly related to, but not equivalent to, the summation of the gravitational components of all the primary distortion processes which are stably and repetitively interacting to form the matter. Therefore, if mass is a function of the total gravitational distortion associated with matter, and mass varies with material velocity, then the total gravitational distortion associated with matter must be altered in some way by a change in material velocity. We will now explore how a change in material velocity alters the total gravitational distortion associated with matter, resulting in the observed relativity of mass. To understand how a change in material velocity affects the distribution of the gravitational distortion associated with matter and so affects the mass of matter, we must first understand that the total gravitational distortion associated with matter consists of both the gravitational distortion currently being radiated by the compound process (which is the simple summation of the component gravitational distortions previously discussed), as well as any residual gravitational distortion previously radiated by the compound process, which the compound process is now catching up to. How does matter, if it’s traveling through space-time at less than the speed of light, catch up to previously radiated gravitational distortions that are propagating at the speed of light? Matter is able to catch up to some of the gravitational distortion it previously radiated because, although those gravitational distortions propagate radially away from the matter at the speed of light, they also propagate in all directions, and so some gravitational distortion is always coming back toward the compound process and adds to the gravitational distortion currently being radiated. Distortion propagation is a function of the ongoing exchange of reality-cell content, which is occurring in all directions simultaneously. Therefore, although the gravitational distortion has been described as outwardly radiating, owing to the omnidirectional exchange of reality-cell content, some gravitational distortion propagates backward in the direction from which it came—i.e., back toward the matter. This situation is, in a limited way, analogous to what happens to a boat traveling so slow that its wake goes to the shore and is reflected back to rock or affect the motion of the boat. These two components making up the total gravitational distortion associated with matter are depicted in figure 56. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality + sum of presently radiating gravitational distortions = + + 345 previously radiated gravitational distortions = total associated gravitational distortion ( mass ) Figure 56 The two factors that contribute to the total gravitational distortion, both internal and external, associated with matter, depicting how those factors determine the mass of matter. The total gravitational distortion (i.e., mass) associated with matter (far right) is the sum of the gravitational distortions presently being radiated by the component processes (far left), plus the now-dissipating gravitational distortion previously radiated by the matter, which the matter is now propagating into (center). The contribution to the total gravitational distortion made by the simple summation of the gravitational distortions associated with the component processes (left) is independent of material velocity, since the number of component processes doesn’t change with changes in material velocity. The contribution to the total gravitational distortion made by the encountered previously radiated gravitational distortion (center) is what varies with material velocity, and it’s this component of the total gravitational distortion associated with matter that’s responsible for the relativity of mass as a function of material velocity. How does a change in material velocity alter the amount of previously radiated gravitational distortion encountered, and so alter the mass of the matter? In general, the higher the material velocity, the greater the distortion content of the previously radiated gravitational distortion when it’s encountered, because it has had fewer periods of content exchange (i.e., less “time”) in which to dissipate or become diluted, resulting in overall greater distortion content associated with the matter and, therefore, relatively more mass, as a measure of the relative increase in the inertial and gravitational fields associated with the matter. Conversely, the lower the material velocity, the less the distortion content of the previously radiated gravitational distortion when it’s encountered, because it has had more periods of content exchange (i.e., more “time”) in which to dissipate or become diluted, resulting in overall less distortion content associated with the matter and, therefore, relatively less mass, as a measure of the relative decrease in the inertial and gravitational fields associated with the matter. The relationship between material velocity and the distortion content of the previously radiated gravitational distortion encountered by the matter is, then, the basis of the relativity of mass, as depicted in figure 57. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality Linear POCEs 0 346 5 Propagation as % of speed of light 100 + + = 50 advancing front of previously radiated gravitational distortion this is less than this this is equal to this + this is less than this + = + previously radiated distortions = total gravitational distortion (mass) 76.7 sum of component distortions Figure 57 The relationship between material velocity and the gravitational distortion associated with matter, measured as mass—more specifically, the relationship between material velocity and the distortion content of the previously radiated gravitational distortion encountered by matter. In these diagrams, two otherwise-identical compound processes with only different material velocities are compared, with the compound process at the top having a lower velocity than the compound process at the bottom. The diagram on the left shows that the matter with a higher velocity (bottom left) stays much closer to the advancing front of the gravitational distortion that it previously radiated. The large circles represent the advancing front of the gravitational distortion after five periods of content exchange (POCEs). The compound process propagating at 50% of the speed of light is farther from its advancing front than is the compound process propagating at 76% of the speed of light after those five POCEs. What this means is that the compound process with a higher velocity is catching up to its previously radiated gravitational distortion with that distortion in a state of less dilution (i.e., a state of greater distortion), because the previously radiated gravitational distortion has had fewer POCEs (i.e., less “time”) in which to dissipate or become diluted. Thus, previously radiated gravitational distortion with greater distortion content is added back to the matter traveling at a higher velocity, giving it a relatively greater total associated gravitational distortion—i.e., relatively more mass. Here, then, is depicted the basis of Einstein’s relativity of mass, which holds that the mass of a material object increases as material velocity increases. To summarize, the compound process with higher velocity has relatively more total associated gravitational distortion than the compound process with a lower velocity, giving the matter with ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 347 a higher velocity more mass, since mass is a measure of the total associated gravitational distortion as manifested in the matter’s gravitational and inertial properties. This way of understanding why mass is relative to material velocity also helps to explain why the relativity of mass becomes significant only at material velocities that approach the speed of light. That explanation is as follows. The gravitational distortion diminishes in distortion content exponentially as it propagates. This exponential diminishment or dilution of distortion content can be inferred from the fact that the attractive force of gravitation decreases as the square of the distance from its point of origin. For example, doubling the distance between two particles will make the force of gravitational attraction between them one quarter as great as it was; quadrupling the distance between two particles will make the force of gravitational attraction between them one-sixteenth as great as it was, and so on. Therefore, at very low material velocities—i.e., far less than the speed of light—the dissipating distortion content the matter catches up to would be exponentially less, and so the previously radiated gravitational distortions would compose an exponentially smaller percentage of the total gravitational distortion associated with the matter, thereby having an exponentially decreasing effect upon the mass of the matter as a reflection of that total gravitational distortion. However, as material velocity increases, approaching the speed of light, the dissipating distortion content the matter catches up to would increase exponentially. Therefore, as material velocity increases, the previously radiated gravitational distortions would compose an exponentially larger percentage of the total gravitational distortion associated with the matter, thereby having an exponentially increasing effect upon the mass of the matter as a reflection of that total gravitational distortion. For this reason, the effect of the relativity of mass varies exponentially as a function of material velocity as a percentage of the speed of light. Here, once again, the relational matrix model provides us with a relatively simple explanation of a seemingly complex phenomenon. According to Einstein’s relativity theory, if the velocity of a material object were to reach the speed of light (which it can’t and still remain matter), the matter would have an infinite mass. This prediction is consistent with the model of mass presented here, because at the speed of light, the component of the total gravitational distortion that is the sum of the gravitational distortions radiated by the component processes would be the same as the previously radiated gravitational distortion, creating an endless feedback of the radiating gravitational distortion into itself, in theory causing the total gravitational distortion to be infinite, thereby causing the mass to be infinite. Again, however, for reasons previously discussed relating to the dynamic structure of matter, such a situation is also impossible, because matter can’t travel at the speed of light and remain matter. All of these different aspects of material reality—i.e., mass, time, and velocity—are interrelated and are thus said to be relative, because they’re all different aspects of the dynamic structure of matter, which itself extends from the underlying and unifying dynamic structure of space. We can’t change one aspect without changing the other aspects, because, although we may give them different names, they remain inseparable as different aspects of the same interconnected whole. To understand why and how changing one aspect of material reality causes a change in the other aspects, we must understand the dynamic structure of matter. To understand the dynamic ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 348 structure of matter, we must first understand how matter exists as an extension of the dynamic structure of space, and such an understanding has been provided here by modeling space as a relational matrix. Conceptual checkpoint I-11 -The material properties of mass, gravitation, and inertia are all manifestations of how the gravitational distortion radiated by a compound process is distributed relative to that compound process. -Gravitation and inertia represent the same force and so are equivalent, because they represent the external and internal distribution, respectively, of the gravitational distortion radiated by a compound process (i.e., matter). -Inertia, or the inertial field, is the gravitational distortion radiated by a compound process that exists internal to the compound process and stabilizes the dynamic structure of the compound process. -The inertial field, by stabilizing the dynamic structure of matter, maintains matter’s pattern of component-process interaction, and thereby causes matter, in the absence of any other force imposed upon it, to travel at a constant velocity and direction. -The gravitational field represents the gravitational distortion radiated by a compound process that exists external to the compound process. -Mass, as a measure of the inertial property of matter, represents the total gravitational distortion associated with a compound process. -The total gravitational distortion and, thus, mass associated with a compound process consists of the sum of the gravitational distortions of the primary distortion processes composing the matter, plus any previously radiated gravitational distortion that the matter catches up to. -The relativity of mass as a function of material velocity is a result of the variation in the distortion content of the previously radiated gravitational distortion that the matter catches up to with different material velocities. -Increased material velocity results in the matter catching up to its previously radiated gravitational distortion with that previously radiated distortion existing in a state of relatively greater distortion, resulting in relatively more previously radiated gravitational distortion being added to the total gravitational distortion associated with the matter, and thus causing a relative increase in what’s measured as the mass of the matter. -Decreased material velocity results in the matter catching up to its previously radiated gravitational distortion with that previously radiated distortion existing in a state of relatively less distortion, resulting in relatively less previously radiated gravitational distortion being added ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 349 to the total gravitational distortion associated with the matter, and thus causing a relative decrease in what’s measured as the mass of the matter. -Mass, time, and velocity, as material properties, are all relative and linked to each other through the speed-of-light constant because these different material properties are all varying aspects of the dynamic structure of matter, which itself extends from, and so is inseparable from, the underlying and unifying dynamic structure of space, the dynamic aspect of which is invariant and manifests as the speed-of-light constant. -Relativity, in general, is then most directly a manifestation of the fact that all energy processes and material objects, as dynamic structures, are extensions of the more fundamental, singular, and invariant dynamic structure of space, which has here been modeled as a relational matrix. -All of these dynamic and structural relationships represent the result of a singular existence that has undergone, and continues to undergo, a process of repetitive and progressive self-relation. Section 10 The Underlying Unity of the Spatial Structure Space-time, being composed of existence that has formed relationships with itself, is inseparable from itself. Although we have defined the relational matrix in terms of reality cells, which themselves have been depicted as spheres or circles, it’s important to understand that these reality cells don’t really have a truly defined or circumscribed existence. That is, even though a reality cell is defined by a circular line or boundary, that line doesn’t actually serve to separate existence on one side of the line from existence on the other side of the line. Rather, that line serves only to denote that a relationship exists between dualized aspects of relative existence. Relative existences, though different, aren’t separably existent, inasmuch as they’re mutually coexistent. Thus, the relational structure of space-time is constructed out of inseparable existence, out of relative existences that may be spatially separate but aren’t existentially separable. In relative existence, each relational pole of a relational pair contains part of the other relational pole. This sharing of existence between relative realities is represented in the T’ai-chi T’u, where within the yin there’s yang, and vice versa. The yin doesn’t exist as such except in relation to yang; the yang doesn’t exist as such except in relation to yin. Therefore, implicit in the existence of each relational pole is also the existence of the other. In this way, each relational pole also contains its opposite or complementary pole. If we apply this principle of shared existence between relative realities to the relational matrix, it becomes possible to see how two reality cells that are separated by spatial distance can share a common existence and thus have a connection that transcends spatial distance, as depicted in figure 58. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 350 a b d c Figure 58 How reality cells that are spatially separate have a connection that transcends spatial distance. Implicit in the existence of each reality cell is the existence of the reality cells it exists in relation to. This shared existence between adjacent reality cells is depicted by the overlap between adjacent reality cells. In figure a, it’s evident that each reality cell shares part of its existence with the adjacent reality cell. However, because of this shared existence between adjacent reality cells, there’s also a shared existence between reality cells that aren’t directly adjacent to one another, as depicted in figure b. That is, the reality cell on the far left in figure b contains part of the existence of the reality cell on the far right, because the reality cell between them, which seems to separate them, contains some of the existence of each. Essentially, what exists here also exists there, although there seems to be something else in between. This logic can then be extended to reality cells that have many intervening reality cells between them, as depicted in figure c. In figure c, the two reality cells at each extreme share part of their existence, because all of the reality cells between them contain some of the existence of all the others. Again, what exists here also exists there, although there seems to be something else in between. This shared existence between reality cells implies an underlying unity that defies the apparent spatial separation between them. In figure d, this logic is applied to the two-dimensional relational-matrix diagram to show that all reality cells share existence and thus are connected in a way that defies spatial separation. Throughout this discussion, as the pieces of reality are brought together in the form of a unified whole, it’s important to remember that the pieces we’re talking about ultimately represent existence which has formed relationships with itself, and although forming these relationships requires that existence become differentiated within itself, such differentiation doesn’t actually separate existence from itself. In Articles 4 & 5 of this work, we will examine how existential self-relation, or differentiation, creates our experience of existence as divisible or separable from itself. For now, all we can do is point out that what we experience as the apparent separability of existence from itself is an artifact of the experiential process, a byproduct of the experiential level of existential selfrelation, and that the more fundamental reality is one of existential unity or inseparability. Therefore, although we may perceive spatial separation between the apparently separate parts of physical reality, the underlying reality is one of nonseparation. That is, although at one level we ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 351 can perceive spatial separation, at another level the reality of that perception doesn’t operate, because at that level the operant reality is one of unity. This existential connection, this nonspatial connection, is real, it exists, but by its nature it can’t be experienced; it can only be understood to exist as a natural consequence of the relational nature of the spatial structure, including the existence of that spatial structure as the product of the successive dualization of a singular existence, as depicted in figure 59. a b c d singular existence shared existence shared existence shared existence Figure 59 How the successive dualization of a singular existence creates an existential connection that defies spatial separation. As existence successively dualizes, thereby forming the relational structure of space-time, reality cells are created that are spatially separate—i.e., they appear to have spatial distance or “space” between them. Yet if we consider the distribution of spatial content as this successive dualization occurs, we can see that spatial content must be shared by reality cells which appear to have “space” between them. As singular existence (a) dualizes into relative realities (b), there’s a shared existence (stippled area), a nonseparation, between these relative realities. As these relative realities themselves dualize (c), each new relative reality itself contains some of this shared existence. As these relative realities again dualize (d), again each new relative reality itself contains some of this shared existence. At the level of dualization depicted in figure d, although spatially separate reality cells can be identified, a sharing of spatial content can also be identified. This sharing of spatial content is what connects reality cells, thereby transcending and defying the apparent spatial separation between them. Regardless of how many times existence dualizes as it forms higher order relationships with itself, thereby evolving into different levels of reality, existence remains throughout singular and interconnected, inseparable from itself. Although we experience reality in apparently separate pieces, the more fundamental reality from which that perception arises is one of singularity, connection, and nonseparation. Each part of the spatial structure, each reality cell, contains some of the existence of all the other reality cells. So, in a very real way, each part of the relational structure of space-time is a reflection of the unified whole from which it extends. 10.1 The extension of physical reality from the spatial structure ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 352 In Articles 4 and 5 of this work, we will explain the experiential process, detailing how compound distortion processes come to be experienced as defined physical-material realities. However, at this time, we will continue to ignore the role that the experiential process plays in the formation of what we experience as physical reality, and for simplicity treat matter and compound distortion processes as synonymous. Physical reality is inseparable from space-time. What we observe as matter is space-time that has formed a relationship with itself. Matter, as a compound distortion process, represents another level of existential self-relation, another way in which existence forms a relationship with itself. Each level of existential self-relation forms the basis for the next level of existential self-relation. By repetitively and progressively existing in relation to itself, existence has evolved stagewise into what we experience as physical reality, as summarized in figure 60. stage 4 experiential reality (structural relationship) stage 3 compound distortion processes (dynamic relationship) stage 2 primary distortion processes uniform relational matrix stage 1 stage 0 (relative existence) nonrelative existence Figure 60 From the bottom up, the stagewise evolution of existence through a process of repetitive and progressive self-relation, leading ultimately to existence’s experience of itself. In the first stage, existence successively dualizes, or repetitively and progressively exists in relation to itself, creating the relational structure of space-time. In the second stage, existence as this dynamic structure of space then exists in relation to itself again, forming the uniformity/distortion duality, or the nonenergy/energy duality. In the third stage, existence forms another relationship with itself, as primary distortion processes stably and repetitively interact with one another, creating the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 353 compound distortion processes we call matter or material objects. In the fourth stage, another level of existential self-relation is formed, as compound distortion processes interact with other distortion processes, thereby creating the experiential level of reality, including what we experience as physical reality. How experiential reality is formed in this fourth stage will be discussed in detail in Articles 4 and 5 of this work. This experiential relationship is depicted as the compound process (large stippled circle) being impacted by a primary distortion process or another compound distortion process (smaller stippled circle). What we experience as physical reality represents a differentiation of the spatial structure. This differentiation occurs as a result of that spatial structure repetitively and progressively existing in relation to itself. Differentiation doesn’t mean division; rather, differentiation means difference in the context of underlying unity. Your body is differentiated, having different aspects that are parts of the unified whole which is you. Your arm extends from your trunk. Your arm is different from your trunk, yet nowhere is there any real separation of one from the other. Likewise, physical reality is different from the spatial structure, yet not in any way separable from that structure. In this way, what we experience as physical reality exists as an extension of the spatial structure, as depicted in figure 61. Figure 61 Physical reality as an extension of the spatial structure. Physical reality represents another level of existential self-relation, extending from the foundation of previous levels of existential self-relation. This point is being made to stress that ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 354 physical reality is in no way separable from the relational structure of space-time, because physical reality is not other than space-time that has formed relationships with itself, and space-time is not other than existence that has formed relationships with itself. From the bottom up: (a) the uniform relational matrix or spatial structure ; (b) the relational matrix with primary distortion processes, which have the same invariant structure and dynamic as the spatial structure itself, represented by the curved vector within the small stippled circles; (c) primary distortion processes interacting to form higher-level compound processes (i.e., matter), depicted as extending from the spatial structure. For reasons to be explained in Articles 4 and 5 of this work, we experience physical reality in the form of material objects, with those forms appearing to exist separate and independent of each other. Although this apparent separation between material objects is experientially real, it’s not ultimately real. That is, at one relational level of reality, at the level of our normal sensory experience, the apparent separation between material objects is the functional reality. However, at other relational levels of reality, at the relational levels of reality that precede the experiential level and that are the foundation of our experience of physical reality, the apparent separation between material objects doesn’t exist and doesn’t operate. Since physical reality is inseparable from the spatial structure and space-time is inseparable from itself, physical reality, though appearing to exist in separate parts, can’t exist in the form of truly or ultimately separable parts or objects, because all physical reality must be interconnected through the underlying unity of the spatial structure from which it extends. In the next section, we will examine how this unbreakable connection may be responsible for some of the strangeness encountered in quantum theory. Section 11 Quantum Theory and the Relational Matrix In the preceding sections, we have related structure to function. Specifically, we have related the dynamic structure of space-time to some of the ways in which physical reality is observed to function. Within that context, we have described space-time as a kind of machination, the operation of which produces what we eventually experience as physical reality. Machines are dynamic structures; they have parts that work together to do whatever it is the machine as a whole does. Space-time has been described as a dynamic structure; it has parts called reality cells, and those reality cells work together to form what we experience as physical reality. However, the reality cells, unlike the parts of physically experienced machines, have no existence independent of the spatial structure of which they’re a part, no existence independent of the other parts of the spatial structure. In this way, while space at one level functions as a machine, at another level it has qualities that transcend the concept of a machine and defy machine-like, or cause-and-effect, descriptions. Both the classical physics of Newton and the relativistic physics of Einstein mathematically describe the machine-like aspects of physical reality. That is, they describe those aspects of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 355 physical reality that exist as the manifestation of the machine-like functioning of the spatial structure, wherein there are assumed to be independently existent parts. In classical physics, the relationship between physical reality and space is analogous to the relationship of billiard balls to a pool table. Material objects are envisioned as existing in an ether, separate from space and separate from each other. In classical physics, the behavior of physical reality is described as the interactions of these billiard balls, where the only relationship of the balls to the table is that the table gives the balls a place to be. In relativistic physics, the inseparability of physical reality from the spatial structure is taken into account. In relativistic physics, the behavior of physical reality is still described to be like the interaction of billiard balls, of separately existent material objects. However, in relativistic physics, a connection is made between the material structure of the billiard balls and the material structure of the pool table upon which the game is being played. The balls are seen to move not independently of the table but as extensions of the table. What were previously thought to be absolute and independent physical characteristics, such as time and mass, are seen to be relative and dependent on each other through the underlying spatial structure from which all material objects extend. Because the treatment of space-time and physical reality as a machine does have a limited validity, the classical and relativistic descriptions of physical reality also have a limited validity—i.e., they don’t tell the whole story. Enter quantum theory. While quantum theory may or may not tell the whole story, what it does do is take the whole story, the description of physical reality, to the next level. In quantum theory, the ultimate inseparability of existence from itself comes into play. In this section, we will make the case that quantum theory is the strange theory it is because it deals with the level of existence at which the ultimate interconnection and underlying unity of reality become unavoidable. Quantum theory is the most accurate method physicists now have of predicting the behavior of physical reality. Yet quantum theory is a very strange theory, indeed, in that what it says about the nature of physical reality makes little sense, inasmuch as it doesn’t correspond to our normal sensory experience. This strangeness includes wave/particle duality, whereby the state of an object depends on how it’s observed. It also includes the uncertainty principle, or the inability to precisely define complementary aspects of an object, such as position and momentum, simultaneously. And it also includes nonlocality, what Einstein called “spooky action at a distance,” whereby observing the state of one particle instantaneously determines the state of another, distant particle, as if they were a single entity. These and other seemingly strange phenomenon, predicted by quantum theory and verified by experiment, aren’t fully explainable in mechanistic, cause-and-effect terms. The meaning of quantum theory—i.e., what it implies with regard to the nature of physical reality—is still a matter of great debate over which there’s little agreement. In the most widely accepted view of quantum theory, called the Copenhagen interpretation, it’s held that what we ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 356 experience as physical reality doesn’t exist in a definite or determinate state before observation and that it’s the act of observation itself that somehow defines or determines the state of physical reality. For instance, according to the Copenhagen interpretation, before we measure the spin of an electron, it has no definite spin state. The relational-matrix model is in agreement with this aspect of the Copenhagen interpretation, as we shall see in Article 4 of this work, where we discuss the basis of wave/particle duality and the uncertainty principle. As mentioned at the beginning of this work, modern physics is moving toward understanding the universe as an interconnected whole. Concepts associated with quantum theory, such as nonlocality, point toward an underlying level of reality wherein what we experience as the separate objects of physical reality are really inseparable and so must be connected or interconnected. In addition, the concept of wave/particle duality associated with quantum theory points toward a level of existence at which the experiencer is inseparable from the experienced reality. The relational-matrix model depicts an undivided, differentiated, interconnected reality wherein no part truly exists separate from any other part. In the next section, the aspect of quantum theory known as nonlocality will be explained as an expression of that underlying unity, of the unity intrinsic to the relational structure of reality. If we understand the fundamental framework of reality to be a relational matrix, a unified, interconnected, inseparable whole, then although we may not be able to fully grasp the nature of that reality, we can, within the context of understanding the underlying unity that exists as the foundation of reality, more clearly appreciate why quantum theory correctly describes physical reality as ultimately nongraspable, undefinable, and indeterminate. 11.1 Nonlocality and the relational matrix As mentioned previously, quantum theory predicts a phenomenon called nonlocality, whereby observation and determination of the state of one particle simultaneously affects the state of another, distant particle, no matter how far apart those particles are. Thus, even though there’s an apparent spatial separation between the particles, quantum theory predicts a more subtle level of interconnection, a nonspatial, or nonlocal connection. This theoretical nonlocal effect was experimentally demonstrated in what are called the Aspect experiments, after the French quantum physicist Alain Aspect. Quantum particles, when observed, display certain characteristics. One of those is a spin state. These characteristics generally come in complementary pairs, such as an up or a down spin state. If two particles in a quantum system together have a zero spin state, then each particle must have the opposite spin state, although the precise state of each particle is indeterminate unless and until it’s observed. Yet, since they must have opposite spin states, determining the spin state of one of the particles through observation then theoretically determines the spin state of the other particle, since it must be the opposite. This seems logical until we remember that, according to quantum theory, neither particle actually has a spin state until that spin state is observed. In quantum theory, the spin states don’t just exist ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 357 to be revealed by observation but are in some way the product of observation. So, observation and determination of the spin state of one particle then gives the other particle the opposite spin state. Before the initial observation, neither particle exists in what could be called a definable spin state. Before the initial observation, each particle has only a potential spin state, which, when determined, has to be the opposite of the other particle’s. In the experiments done to test the theory of nonlocality, the two particles are separated a relatively great distance, and the spin state of one particle is determined. The second particle, then, is always observed to be in the opposite spin state, demonstrating some kind of nonlocal connection between the particles. The strange thing is that observation and determination of the spin state of one particle instantaneously determines the spin state of the other particle, no matter how far apart those particles are. The crux of the strangeness is, how does the second particle instantaneously “know” what the spin state of the first particle was determined to be, thereby “causing” it to be in the opposite spin state? How is information transferred between two apparently separate particles faster than the speed of light? Many explanations to mechanically account for this phenomenon have been proposed. Most are so-called hidden-variable theories, which attempt to come up with some type of unseen causeand-effect mechanism whereby one particle affects the other. These explanations, however, avoid the most obvious conclusion, which is that the apparent separateness of the particles is itself an illusion, isn’t ultimately real, and that nonlocality is simply a manifestation of the ultimate unity underlying what we observe as separate physical objects. The strangeness and unexpectedness of the phenomenon of nonlocality is predicated upon the assumption that the particles are, in fact, separate entities. While this assumption seems valid, since it corresponds to our normal sensory experience, it’s nonetheless still just an assumption. In fact, it’s an assumption that quantum theory itself defies. The question is and remains, how does determining the spin state of one particle simultaneously determine the spin state of another, distant particle, one that’s nonlocal? The answer lies in the unity implicit in the relational spatial structure, and, thus, in the unity implicit in physical reality as an extension of that relational structure. Sometimes, in order to answer a difficult question, the question itself must be rephrased. Sometimes the difficulty in finding an answer lies in the form of the question, which implies the existence of a nonexistent state of reality and thereby precludes one from ever finding a valid answer. For instance, we could ask, which came first, the chicken or the egg? The form of this question implies a linear cause-and-effect relationship between the chicken and the egg, and the question seeks to find the order of that relationship. The question in this form has no valid answer, because the relationship of the chicken and the egg isn’t actually linear, or cause and effect; rather, it’s cyclic, or relational. The chicken comes from the egg, and the egg comes from the chicken. Although this relationship appears in time as linear, as a whole the chicken exists in ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 358 relation to the egg, and the egg exists in relation to the chicken, and so neither chicken nor egg exists as such except in relation to each other. The form of the question is invalid because it’s based on a false assumption, one of linear causality. Therefore, the question in that form has no valid answer. The question is born of our perception, but our perception is illusory—i.e., it doesn’t correspond to the underlying reality. Therefore, the question can’t produce an answer that corresponds to the underlying reality. The same situation exists when we try to understand nonlocality by asking, “How does determining the spin state of one particle affect the spin state of another, distant particle?” The question in this form implies and assumes that our observation of the two particles as separate entities is the total reality, the “whole picture.” While this separation may be real at one level of reality, at the experiential level, if space-time is a relational matrix, as this work sets out to demonstrate, then that separation isn’t ultimately real because it doesn’t exist at the more fundamental level of reality from which physical reality extends. If we approach the phenomenon of nonlocality with this understanding, we can understand why nonlocality exists and occurs. Instead of assuming that the particles are actually separate, let’s assume the opposite, that they’re not actually separate, but only appear separate because we can’t perceive the unified structure from which they extend and to which they’re connected, and which thereby unites them. This approach is based on what has been presented in this work to demonstrate that space-time functions as a relational matrix and that one of the properties of the relational matrix is an underlying unity and interconnection between its relational parts. In order to understand nonlocality within the context of the underlying unity of the spatial structure, we will ask, “How can particles that appear separate be connected, and thus function as a single unit, thereby demonstrating nonlocal behavior?” Within this context, the question is also the answer. Nonlocality exists because what we observe as separate particles aren’t ultimately separable entities, and so they can function in some ways as a single unit, as depicted in figure 62. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality a total spin = 0 b total spin = 0 359 individual spin = potential individual spin = potential "spooky action at a distance" c observation observation spin determined clockwise spin becomes counter clockwise the unseen spatial connection b' total spin = 0 c' individual spin = potential the unseen spatial connection observation observation spin determined clockwise spin becomes counter clockwise Figure 62 The unity underlying physical reality that’s responsible for the phenomenon of nonlocality. There are two related factors to consider in the analysis of nonlocality: (1) that physical reality as it’s observed to exist in any definite state, such as a certain spin state, is a product of observation; and (2) that what exists as a particle in our experience is inseparable from the relational structure of space-time and so is inseparable from other particles. In figure a, two particles in a quantum state have indeterminate but opposite spin states. Those particles are separated (b), the total spin remains zero, and the spin state of each particle remains indeterminate—not only unknown but also nonexistent, only a potential. The spin state of one particle is determined, and simultaneously the other particle takes on the opposite spin state (c). If these particles are seen as separate physical entities, with no real connection between them, this effect is mysterious, or, as Einstein saw it, “spooky action at a distance.” However, if we take into account the underlying unity implicit in the relational structure of space-time, considering the separation of the particles to be ultimately an illusion, and therefore treat and model the particles as a single unit (b’), this nonlocal effect is understandable as the result of observation of the two complementary poles of a single unit (c’). Here, this is depicted as when one end of a rod is rotated clockwise, the other end is always seen to rotate counter clockwise. The stippled areas in both figures b’ and c’ represent the unseen spatial connection, the shared existence, between the particles implicit in the relational spatial structure. This unseen ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 360 spatial connection may be what allows the apparently separate particles to defy their observed spatial separation. What are observed to be separate particles, separably existent material objects, are actually the complementary observational poles of an unobservable whole. If one observational pole is affected in one way, the other observational pole will simultaneously be affected in the opposite way. For instance, if the head of a coin is turned down, its tail is turned up. If the head faces north, the tail faces south. If one end of a rod is rotated clockwise, the other end is observed to rotate counter clockwise. This may be the basis of nonlocality. Within the context of an underlying existential unity, nonlocality is neither spooky nor mysterious but both explicable and expectable, just as a magic trick is mysterious until we discover the nature of the illusion that was created to make the trick seem real. In this case, the illusion is the apparent separateness of physical reality imposed by the experiential process. How the experiential process functions to create the apparent separateness of physical reality will be the subject of Article 4 of this work. 11.2 The meaning of quantum theory What’s the true state of physical reality: the unity and indeterminacy that quantum theory implies, or the division and determinism that our experience implies? These seem to be incompatible states of being, yet they really aren’t. Living on and experiencing the fourth floor of a building doesn’t mean that the first, second, and third floors don’t exist. Reality is structured in the same way. We live on the fourth floor of reality, the experiential level, which here has been defined as the fourth stage of existential self-relation (depicted in figures I, 2, and 60). While on that experiential level, the reality of the preceding levels is obscured, yet they still exist, as they must exist in order to support the reality of the fourth floor. While we’re on the fourth floor, the divisive quality of our experience is dominant. Yet this dominant divisive quality cannot and does not eliminate the existential unity that continues to exist on the first, second, and third floors of reality, from which existential unity the fourth floor extends. Although we tend to think of reality in absolute terms, feeling that something must be either real or unreal, existent or nonexistent, with nothing in between, the relational nature of reality is such that what may be perfectly real at one level of existence may be unreal at another level. Each level of existential self-relation is based on a prior level of existential self-relation that’s more basic than the levels which extend from it. Each level of existential self-relation functions as a foundation from which the next level extends. Each level of existential self-relation is more basic than the next because, while each level exists in the absence of the levels that extend from it, the levels that extend from it don’t exist in its absence. A reality that exists as part of a relationship exists as such, as a reality, only within the context of that relationship. Beyond that relationship, the reality doesn’t exist, although the existence that’s ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 361 the foundation of the relationship continues to exist. In this way, while existence itself is always real, a given reality may not always exist. Thus, there are degrees of reality. The most basic level of reality is absolute reality, the level from which all relational levels of reality extend. Absolute reality exists as it is regardless. The undifferentiated relational matrix is one relational level of reality. It’s real, but not as real as the absolute reality from which it extends. The differentiated relational matrix is another relational level of reality; it’s real, but not as real as the undifferentiated level of reality from which it extends. Physical reality is also real, but not as real as the undivided differentiated level of reality from which it extends. The crux of the matter is that physical reality—the reality we hold so dear, the reality that to us seems the realest, and that for us defines what “real” is—is actually the least real state of reality. Physical reality is real, but it doesn’t extend past the level of our experience into the undivided differentiated level of reality that is itself the foundation of the experiential level of reality. Quantum theory is what we get when the reality of the fourth floor tries to poke its head into the reality of the third floor. In describing what it has found on the third floor, quantum theory must use terms native to the fourth floor. To paraphrase Neils Bohr, quantum theory is constrained by the necessity of the use of classical terminology (i.e., terminology derived from experiential reality, from living on the fourth floor). For this reason, quantum theory doesn’t say what reality is (at the levels below the fourth floor), but quantum theory is what we can say about reality (as it’s observed to exist from the fourth floor). So, what quantum theory says about reality seems like non-sense—i.e., literally not like our normal sensory experience of reality on the fourth floor. The reality of the third floor simply can’t be perfectly translated to the reality of the fourth floor. The strangeness of quantum theory isn’t in the theory itself or in what the theory says about the nature of physical reality. The strangeness of quantum theory is a function of how what the theory says about the nature of physical reality contrasts with what we experience physical reality to be. Quantum theory and experiment consistently present us with a reality that’s inseparable from itself, while sensory experience consistently presents us with a reality that is separable from itself. The difficulty in understanding quantum theory is in reconciling these two apparently mutually exclusive experiences of reality. The difficulty in accepting or understanding what quantum theory says about the nature of physical reality isn’t a product of the theory itself but a manifestation of our refusal to let go of our prior conception of reality as determinable, as ultimately definable, as in some way separable from itself. Our prior conception of reality is the result of our normal sensory experience always presenting us with defined realities. It’s therefore not surprising that we’ve found it difficult to let go of a deterministic view of reality, since this is the view we get from our normal sensory experience. At one time, it seemed obvious that the Earth was at the center of the universe; at that time, it must have seemed very strange to consider that the Earth wasn’t at the center of the universe. At ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 362 one time, it seemed obvious that the Earth was flat; at that time, it must have seemed very strange to consider that the Earth wasn’t flat. These observations seemed obvious, and their opposite observations strange, because the general experience was of a flat Earth and an Earth around which other things revolved. However, further and deeper experience showed these experiences to be essentially illusory, presenting humanity with false conclusions regarding the true nature of reality. At this time, it seems very strange to consider that physical reality isn’t quite what we experience it to be. However, the deeper experience of quantum reality has shown that our normal sensory experience presents us with an essentially illusory view of what physical reality is, a view that has led humanity to make a false assumption regarding the true nature of that reality. At some time in the future, as humanity comes to more fully understand the means by which experience is created, and thereby comes to understand the nature of what we experience as physical reality, the deterministic and mechanistic conception of reality we now hold so dear will fade. At that time, what now seems strange for us to consider will have become obvious, while what we now accept as obvious will itself seem as strange to us as it now does to think that the Earth is flat. It’s now time to move on to an examination of the process by which our experiences of reality are created. We will do this by analyzing the basis of two fundamental phenomena associated with quantum theory, i.e., wave/particle duality and the uncertainty or indeterminacy principle. Through that analysis, we will come to an understanding of why and how experiential reality is presented to us as it is, and within that context it will be possible to see how an experientially real division can exist in the context of a more fundamentally real unity. Conceptual checkpoint I-12 -The relational nature of the spatial structure implies a shared existence, an interconnectedness, that defies apparent spatial separation between all areas of space-time. -The development of primary and compound distortion processes (i.e., energy and matter) within the relational matrix represents a differentiation of the relational matrix, “differentiation” meaning the existence of difference within the context of a more fundamental underlying unity. -Primary and compound distortion processes are extensions of the relational spatial structure, inseparable from that structure, and so they must themselves be interconnected through the underlying unity of the spatial structure in a way that defies apparent spatial separation. -The connection between material objects implicit in the relational spatial structure may be responsible for the phenomenon of nonlocality. -Quantum theory seems strange because it presents us with a view of an interconnected reality that exists in contrast to the view of a disconnected reality we get from our normal sensory experience. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 279-363 Kaufman, S. E. The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality II: Relating the Model to Space-Time and Physical Reality 363 -The experiential level of reality represents the fourth level of existential self-relation, the fourth way in which existence can form a relationship with itself. -At the experiential level of reality existence appears to exist in the form of independently existent parts. -The apparent separability of reality, e.g., the appearance that material objects are separately existent from other physical objects, is a byproduct of the experiential process, an artifact created when physical reality comes into existence as an experiential reality. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 153-158 Oliver, A. What I Think about Consciousness 153 Article What I Think about Consciousness Alan Oliver ABSTRACT Consciousness is a property of Akashic space to the extent that it has no boundaries. The apprehension of a memory is normally limited to the experience of the individual, and I believe this is a function of Ahamkara, the self-identity of the individual. We are all a memory address code. Memory, in the general sense, is generated by mind and in turn memory influences mind. There is more to it. Memory begins with an event or experience being observed by buddhi. In Yoga Sutra Patanjali describes two kinds of memory. The first is the general kind of memory in which the object of apprehension is primary. The second kind of memory is one in which the instrument and process of apprehension are primary. These distinctions allow me to discriminate between my experience of Samapatti and that of the subject. Key Words: consciousness, memory, Akashic, Ahamkara, Yoga Sutras, Patanjali 1. Introduction1 My previous article in JCER (Oliver, 2010) carried a diagram from a Yoga teacher, describing the entry of consciousness into physical reality, and in particular, into living entities. In making that submission I had made a decision to simplify the diagram to some extent and in retrospect that may have been unwise. On the other hand, it is likely that someone coming to see that model for the first time may have had a degree of culture shock to deal with, so my decision to simplify might have lessened that impact. The diagram contains a number of Sanskrit words, and although they may sound foreign at first, we should realize that Sanskrit is a scientific language developed to achieve descriptions of non-physical events unable to be described within the existing language of the time. Many laypersons find much of current science language a bit foreign, and it is true that if science used everyday language to describe their work it would progress very slowly indeed. What I omitted in that diagram was to say that AHAMKARA, EGO or I AM is also present on the line marked RAJAS. I will explain how that word relates to our understanding of consciousness a little later. The second part of the diagram I should have explained is SATTVA, which, at first glance would be interpreted to apply only to the sloping line on the left leading to Mind. The third omission lies at the end of the sloping line marked TAMAS and leading to Body. At the end of that line I should have included the five basic evolutes of matter; namely, earth, air, fire water and space. While most are familiar with the first four traditional names of these evolutes, the reader may be surprised to find mention of the last on the list. Here the word, space, is called Akasha, and is given the title MAHAT, which means the greatest teacher. That word, MAHAT, also appears at the high section of the diagram and that too will be explained as we go. Patanjali explains that AKASHA/ space is not the same as physical space; science was not the first to notice the idea of non-local or pre spacetime space. Indeed, the earliest Yoga masters described the smallest particle as being merely a point without mass! In its original form, the diagram also placed Subjectivity at the end of the SATTVA line and Objectivity at the end of the TAMAS. If one wanted to go deeply into the Yoga Sutras they would obviously find even more detailed diagrams and explanations. For the purpose of understanding what I have to say about consciousness I prefer to stay with those aspects of Yoga that are directly related to what I have to say on that account. Correspondence: Cr. Alan J. Oliver, 9 Mason Street, Port Elliot, South Australia 5212. E-mail: thinkerman1@bigpond.com ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 153-158 Oliver, A. What I Think about Consciousness 154 In my description of the diagram I emphasize this is my understanding of it, and that it might differ from a Yoga scholar’s perspective. Having said that, I am confident my assertion that Yoga and modern science are describing the same reality in much the same way is a valid one. I guess the main difference is that Yoga starts from a model of wholeness while modern science is edging its way towards wholeness via a THEORY OF EVERYTHING. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 153-158 Oliver, A. What I Think about Consciousness 155 2. Yoga Model Yoga says that reality begins with the first disequilibrium (Big Bang). Prior to that event, the three attributes of unmanifest prakriti, which are in equilibrium before the creation of the evolutes whose disequilibrium constitutes the process of creation. All material entities (evolutes) including the mind are composites of the three Gunas: purity and illumination (Sattva); activity (Rajas); inertia (Tamas). They are the seats of pleasure, pain and delusion. The illumination within Sattva is pure consciousness reflected on prakriti and therefore we need to note that the diagram described Sattva’s presence across all of the levels on the diagram. Rajas and Tamas operate on the lower part of the diagram and influence whatever is created through the process of evolving from energy into matter. Also note that since Mahat appears at the earlier level of the diagram as well as at the bottom, there will be attributes of Mahat at every level. As the greatest teacher, the presence of Mahat implies consciousness with the ability to inform exists at every level of the diagram from Mahat downwards. This is why I say I would agree with the late David Bohm in saying the “all matter contains all information”. However, for this to be practical there has to be some way of making sense of ALL of the information in respect of an individual conscious entity. So we arrive at the first appearance of Mahat. This represents the first vehicle of purusha. It is the first appearance of buddhi, the faculty of intelligence, intellection and discrimination. Next we find Ahamkara, which is ego, the principle of self-identification. I like to say this is our I Amness; the cognition of an individual existence or being. And I would say in this context, being is a verb rather than a noun. At this point the duality implicit in the model contained the shared potentials to know and to be. I call this point of divergence Objective Subjectivity and I’ll explain why later. Now these potentials diverge into the distinction between Mind and Matter. This has been called The Great Illusion, or Maya, and I believe it is easier understand if we consider this part of the diagram piece by piece. On the left we have MIND, which has five cognitive senses and five active senses. These may be a clue to resolving the Hard Problem; what the diagram is inferring (from my perspective) is a relationship between the five physical senses and the Mind’s awareness of them, with its ability to make distinctions about itself and the body’s experiences. I would call this end point Subjectivity. On the other side of the diagram we have the evolutes of material reality which, in traditional cultures, have been called earth, water, fire, air and space. As mentioned earlier, space in this context is called Akasha, and refers to a dimensionless space containing information as a potential for the manifestation of matter. I would call this end point Objectivity because this is where reality is regarded as real and measurable. The arrow between the two divergent lines represents Rajas, which is action. It also represents Ahamkara, the Mind’s perspective of I AM, which impels both Mind and Body to act in the sense that Mind will think and Body will move in response to its opposite based upon who I AM. We could go into a whole library of discussions and opinions about this last statement but I will leave that to the philosophers, who of course are influenced by the Ahamkara of their school, their own thoughts or their culture. In Yoga these influences are called modifications of the mind. I offer some of my experiences, not to say something about me but to note their relevance to the diagram and to their capacity for understanding a whole reality. In conversations with psychologists and philosophers about these experiences I was told they would be classified as ‘anomalies’. In a conversation with a man who practiced Raja Yoga, I was told that it was impossible for someone to enter Samapatti without having spent years of study under accredited teacher. Nonetheless, he didn’t offer any explanation how I could have had the experiences. Before I narrate the experiences, let me say that I lack the ability to imagine anything in the form of mental images. This too will become a part of the discussion on consciousness. 3. Some Experiences The boundaries of where I end and someone else begins have become extremely indistinct for me through my relationship with others. In one instance I was helping lady whose fractured leg refused to knit. During the course of the healing I felt inclined to mentally remove the energy of the ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 153-158 Oliver, A. What I Think about Consciousness 156 bone marrow and replace it with fresh energy. I did this silently and without any movement. I did not visualize this happening, I felt it was needed and knew it had happened. What surprised me was that she described exactly what I knew had been done; she said she saw it being done. The interesting point here is that she saw something I mentally narrated; we couldn’t have shared the same image because I didn’t have an image in my mind. A week later she had the leg x-rayed in preparation for a bone graft; the x-ray showed new bone growth at the fracture site. On another occasion I had been asked to help a mentally disturbed cat. The owner told me this cat was antisocial, flighty, and hadn’t washed itself in a long time. It smelled pretty awful so I believed what she had said. I put the cat on my lap and held my hand on its head. It fell asleep and I had images of number simultaneous scenes, all of which were very chaotic. After some time the chaos vanished, to be replaced by a garden scene. I had the experience of moving through this garden. I felt something was out of the ordinary and at first I couldn’t fathom what was amiss. While there was a sense of something being different, I felt I was somewhere that was comfortable and familiar. The plants appeared to be much bigger than they should, as if I was seeing them through the eyes of the cat rather than through my own eyes. Even stranger were the colors; although I could recognize grass and plants they had no blue or green color. Everything was in shades of yellows, reds and browns. Now, even if I could imagine a garden from the cat’s eye level, I doubt if or I, anyone else, could specifically imagine from within the cat’s visual range, at the infra red end of the color spectrum while also imagining the landscape as it may appear to a cat. Sensing the task was complete, I looked at the cat and it began to stir. After a bit of stretching it began to wash itself. My friend was impressed; I was too, but kept that to myself because the significance of what had happened seemed to be far more important than the experience itself. On another occasion I was asked to help a man who suffered from Huntington’s chorea. Once again, I found that by being focused on him while being in my state of stillness his involuntary movements ceased for the time I held my focus. This was typically 45 minutes at a time. The sessions gave him the confidence that he could have some control and that is what I suggested would be the case through practice. Over a period of around six months of one session per week and practice by himself he was able to leave the residential care facility where had lived. He moved in with a friend and was able to take on paid work. I gave up doing this because I wanted to know how it worked, although I continued to see a friend who had breast cancer. My search led me to The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, by Pandit Usharbuddh Arya. There is discovered Yoga Sutra 1.41, which described the process called Samapatti, in which two minds can coalesce. For this to happen, the mind of the seer must be under control. What that means is that all experience which would normally influence who I think I AM must have no input at all. Essentially the mind becomes empty and individuality is set aside. Not an easy task, except for one who happens to have been born that way. The difficulty for me was the notion of being a seer by default. I had spoken of these events with Dr. Bevan Reid, a cancer researcher who had become my mentor. He told me of his experiments at the University of Sydney; he had found the apparent capacity for the laboratory space to retain information. He had found that cell cultures grown in the presence of a mass of lead had a shorter life span that was the norm. He also found that with the lead removed from the laboratory space, fresh cell cultures also died at this accelerated rate. The effect lasted for weeks and involved fresh cell cultures when they were introduced. Other experiments involving the electrical capacitance of water, he found this measured value changed with changes in atmospheric pressure, and also in response to chemical reactions nearby. Theorizing these effects were ‘action-at-a-distance’, he coated a microscope slide with a polystyrene solution and examined it as it dried. He saw specks on the surface which, under greater magnification were seen to be small vortices. One of these coated slides had the image of a cell, together with staining (Gram stain) on the cell’s image. He was able to capture this same image on newly coated slides over a few weeks. His conclusion was that the cell’s experience of the stain was retained in the space, and that on recreating the same contextual arrangement the cell’s memory of that event was recalled. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 153-158 Oliver, A. What I Think about Consciousness 157 4. Conclusion By observation, consciousness is a property of Akashic space to the extent that it has no boundaries. The apprehension of a memory is normally limited to the experience of the individual, and I believe this is a function of Ahamkara, the self-identity of the individual. We are all a memory address code. Memory, in the general sense, is generated by mind and in turn memory influences mind. There is more to it. Memory begins with an event or experience being observed by buddhi. In Yoga Sutra 1.11 Patanjali describes two kinds of memory. The first is the general kind of memory in which the object of apprehension is primary. The second kind of memory is one in which the instrument and process of apprehension are primary. These distinctions allow me to discriminate between my experience of Samapatti and that of the subject. Samapatti is described in the Yoga Sutra 1.41 in the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, which states that when the mind of the seer is free of disturbances it will coalesce with the mind of another person who the seer is focused upon. In the process each mind takes on the content of the other. What was of particular interest to me (as the seer) was the fact that while I was aware of the other person’s pain for example, I was aware that it was not my pain. On the other hand, the other person became aware they were very calm, (my calmness) and retained that experience of distraction from pain for some time afterwards. In each case they did not know they felt my calmness; they just knew the pain had stopped for the duration of the coalescence. In Patanjali’s description of the process of Samapatti he uses the terms, object or subject being apprehended (by buddhi), the instrument of apprehension and the process of apprehension. For the subject, the experience of my stillness is real and generates a memory which, when recalled can produce that sense of calmness or distraction from pain. When I recall the Samapatti experience I have no experience of the subject’s pain, just the observation that it happened; in other words, my memory is only a narrative or observation of the event. Obviously, the fact that the two minds coalesced is fairly straightforward. What merits some examination is the second kind of memory and the attendant implications. This observation includes the object of apprehension, together with the impact the experience has on the individual. The object of apprehension means the sensory perception of the object or event as well as what this cognition means to us. Thus, it can, and indeed will, influence what we think about that object and how the experience adds to or subtracts from our personal definition. Think about how you feel when you win in contrast to when you lose anything, be that a game, a debate or a theory. However, in Samapatti the seer has the pain of the subject as the object of apprehension but the subsequent memory of that event will only contain buddhi’s observation of it as a narrative. You cannot “read” another’s mind in Samapatti. It is also obvious that how one receives the information from another will be interpreted by the mind of the receiver. The cat experienced my stillness as a comfortable dream; the man with Huntington’s did much the same since these sufferers do not have shakes during sleep. The lady with the leg fracture interpreted my imageless thought visually. The process of Samapatti has been described as the effect of ‘being in the presence of’. Thus, the mind in the presence of consciousness becomes conscious. Mind on the other hand is the servant of consciousness and, as in meditation, mind can be brought to rest and yet one is conscious. This can be a surprise the first time you experience the mind being still and yet you are aware that I remains. It is the first experience of the duality rather than the illusion, which I call Objective Subjectivity. From these observations I conclude that consciousness is external to the body and interacts with the body’s processes such as the neurological systems because the neurological systems and their processes have consciousness within their tissue. This interaction is a two-way communication giving rise to the impression of consciousness we call mind. It also is the means by which information from memory informs all of the body when we remember, which is why that most people have sensory as well as cognitive responses to a memory. The capture of the image of a cell over a few weeks suggests that every cell in a body has a selfidentity which, collectively, is the whole-of-person identity. The Mind, so far as our conscious ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 153-158 Oliver, A. What I Think about Consciousness 158 awareness is concerned, is predominantly focused on the whole person. Over time, this identity becomes the person we believe ourselves to be. Beyond our conscious awareness the individual cells are conscious of their immediate environment and they carry on their functions without that level of consciousness entering our (conscious) thoughts. In meditation the focus of consciousness is directed toward an external object and mind becomes silent and still. In that state consciousness becomes aware of itself, and experiences bliss. Ten years ago I fell into a state of bliss while sitting at the bedside of my daughter who was in a coma, her body having rejected a heart/lung transplant .As I looked at her I went into that bliss state and it remained with me for weeks afterwards. She died a few hours after I had sat there and I realized I had experienced the state she was in. Other grieving family members were upset by my lack of grief. While one can remember having been in that state of bliss, in my case the memory of the state, no matter how personally significant does not evoke the state of bliss. Thus there are (for consciousness) two kinds of memory. The first kind is that experienced by mind, in which the object or event being remembered is primary. The second kind of memory is that of consciousness, in which the fact that an event happened is recalled as a statement of the fact; the event itself is not reexperienced. Finally, whether consciousness is external or a biological process arising in brain tissue, the awareness we call consciousness will be aware in either model. There are numerous reports of neardeath experiences, in which the person has a memory of having been outside of their body. In many, the person was on the operating table during surgery, and on waking gives an account of some part of the procedure, at times even including conversations between members of the surgical team. In others the person has a memory of seeing her/himself on the operating table, sometimes from high above. Whether it is an effect of the anesthetic or other drugs causing the absence of bodily sensory perception I cannot say. What I can say is there is a possibility that the instrument and process of apprehension are still active during ‘unconsciousness’ and in these instances have laid down a memory. Those with an active imagination will ‘fill in the gaps’ of what was probably only a momentary flash of awareness, in much the same way as a ZIP message can be extrapolated into the full picture. Of course, we will never know if we persist with the view that the mind is of the brain. Many ‘spiritual’ systems of belief talk about the need to be ‘in the world but not of the world’ and such a view is generally acceptable. A Buddhist teacher would say the mind is sometimes IN the brain but not OF the brain. We can accept that too, provided he/she is not talking about matters neurological. In the end, what it all comes down to is what we have to give up, to be capable of believing something novel. Yoga talks about five aspects of the modifications of the mind. They are: ignorance of the illusion, I-am-ness, attraction, repulsion and fear of death. Through ignorance we fear the end of who we think ourselves to be. We struggle to maintain a status quo through maintaining what we like and avoiding what we dislike. Our decisions are based on that same status quo, which might the pursuit of a more meaningful and rewarding role in life, our public image as well as our self image; the list is almost endless. These modify and determine the way we think, which, in turn determines what we can think, and more crucially what we are prepared to think. Politics is a good example of decisions based on personal needs, party needs and lobbyist’s needs and, on occasion, the public good. In daily life we make decisions based on immediate self-needs and ‘commonsense’ is very thin on the ground. But this is not about how others think. The point is that Ahamkara determines actions of both the mind and the body, whether that be an individual body or mind, or a body politic or a body corporate. References Oliver, A. J. Addressing the hard problem. JCER; 1:1 pp46-49, 2010. Reid, B. L. On the nature of growth and new growth based on experiments designed to reveal a structure and function for laboratory space. Medical Hypotheses, 29, pp105-127, 1989. ISSN: Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

767 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 767-769 Nixon, Gregory, Response to the Commentary of Syamala Hari Response to Commentary ‘WHO CAN SAY WHENCE IT ALL CAME, AND HOW CREATION HAPPENED?’ (‘Rig Veda’, X, 129) Gregory M. Nixon* My title is taken from a line in the Rig Veda as it was reproduced in Mircea Eliade’s sourcebook for the History of Religions. Since Syamala Hari sent a thoughtprovoking commentary relating my enthusiastic but inarticulate speculations on the source of time, space, and experience (as found in my guest editorial “Time & Experience: Twins of the Eternal Now?” in JCER 1[5]) to the august and prolific thinking of “Indian Philosophy”, I thought I might be allowed to reply with a voice from the Vedas. I should note that Meera Chakravorty submitted an article1 that also elucidated “Indian Philosophy” (specifically from the Sankhya or Samkhya school of thought) in a way that makes it seem as though I were directly inspired by it. (I use scare quotes around “Indian Philosophy” since I am in doubt that there is any such unified entity, though, of course, there are all sorts of Indian philosophies, both modern and ancient.) In any case, to both of these commentators, I express my sincere gratitude, for you led me to explore further in these esoteric (to me) realms. I openly admit that I was taken aback to see how these ancient speculations both anticipate and go far beyond anything my poorly researched attempt at suggesting an eternal present of dynamic nothingness as the ultimate source of, well, everything. I trust this is a real case of synchronicity, but it is not unlikely that my readings of Joseph Campbell of nearly 40 years ago may have brought me into previous contact with this sort of metaphysics. In response, I reproduce this commentary by Eliade, followed by some directly relevant lines from the poetry of Rig Veda, X, 129. What I especially like is the ambivalence of belief herein expressed. I have politely communicated before with Syamala that I share her wonder at a possible Source that creates yet is itself beyond all space, time, experience, and consciousness (small “c”), but that I do not believe in God — that is, I do not believe in any God that is an entity or being (even a deity) or one that can be named like a person. This leaves me with the mysterious paradox of a Source that both exists and does not, that is aware (what Syamala calls Conscious with a capital “C”, implying to me cosmic consciousness) yet is not aware OF anything, and that is quiescent and invisible yet infinitely dynamic in potential. In fact, it is a Nothing that is Everything — and this seems to me well beyond anything our mere human verbal or numerical expressions can ever hope to grasp. * Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada. Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx Email: doknyx@shaw.ca 1 The article was vastly informative but not in a format we could use. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 768 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 767-769 Nixon, Gregory, Response to the Commentary of Syamala Hari The point is, however, that the author of at least this part of the Vedas felt this same awestruck ambivalence so very long ago, probably sensing, as I did, that our all-toohuman speculations could never encompass the mystery of mysteries. And s/he managed to express it certainly better than I did, and just as beautifully as did T. S. Eliot with his “still point of the turning world”. Here is the complete quotation from Eliade’s sourcebook: ‘WHO CAN SAY WHENCE IT ALL CAME, AND HOW CREATION HAPPENED?’ (‘Rig Veda’, X, 129) This creation hymn is at once a supreme expression of the poetry and philosophy of the Rig Veda and an eloquent murmur of doubt, which carries over into the Upanishads its sense of depth, the mystery, and above all the unity of all creation. In ‘darkness concealed in darkness’ (tamas in tamas), in those ‘unillumined waters’ which harbour no ‘being’ (sat) or ‘non-being’ (asat), there is generated, by cosmic heat (tapas) the primordial unitary force, That One (tad ekam). ‘Desire’ (kãma) now arose as the primal seed of ‘mind’ (manas), the firstborn of tad ekam, and the rishis, who ‘see’ that original moment when the gods were not, claim now to know the bond of sat in asat. ‘But who knows truly,’ concludes the poet, still in reverence before the mystery: perhaps That One ‘whose eye controls this world’; but then perhaps he truly does not know. Not only Upanshadic speculation, but also the evolutionary philosophy of the Samkhya system was deeply impressed by this speculation of cosmic origins alongside other Rig Vedic creation accounts such as x, 90 … and x, 112 … or I, 32. (Mircea Eliade, editor) 1. Then [in the beginning] even nothingness was not, nor existence. There was no air then, nor the heavens beyond it. What covered it? Where was it? In whose keeping? Was there then cosmic water, in depths unfathomed? 2. Then there were neither death nor immortality, nor was there then the torch of night and day. The One breathed windlessly and self-sustaining. There was that One then then, and there was no other. 3. At first there was only darkness wrapped in darkness. All this was only unillumined water. That One which came to be, enclosed in nothing, arose at last, born of the power of heat. 4. In the beginning desire descended on it — that was the primal seed, born of the mind. The sages who have searched their hearts with wisdom know that which is, is kin to that which is not. 5. And they have stretched their cord across the void, and know what was above, and what below. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 769 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 767-769 Nixon, Gregory, Response to the Commentary of Syamala Hari Seminal powers made fertile mighty forces. Below was strength, and over it was impulse. 6. But, after all, who knows, and who can say whence it all came, and how creation happened? The gods themselves are later than creation, so who knows truly whence it has arisen? 7. Whence all creation had its origins, he, whether he fashioned it or whether he did not, he, who surveys it all from highest heaven, he knows — or maybe even he does not know. Rig Veda translation by A. L. Basham (1954), The Wonder That Was India: London, pp. 247-8. In Mircea Eliade, Ed. (1964), From Primitives to Zen: A Thematic Sourcebook of the History of Religions (pp. 109-110). New York: Harper & Row. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

220 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 220-227 Kaufman, S. E. Introduction to Relational-Matrix Model of Reality Article Introduction to The Relational-Matrix Model of Reality Steven E. Kaufman* ABSTRACT In this series of articles, we will show that reality as a whole can be consistently accounted for only if we understand that the nature of the singular existence from which reality extends through the process of repetitive and progressive self-relation isn’t other than consciousness itself. Thus, we will demonstrate that consciousness doesn’t come into existence at some later stage in the evolution of reality, but rather that the evolution of existence isn’t other than the evolution of consciousness and that experiential reality itself is what comes into existence at a certain stage in the evolution of consciousness-existence. In other words, we will show that consciousness isn’t a product of the machinations of physical reality but, on the contrary, that physical reality, as we experience it to exist, is itself a product of consciousness, albeit consciousness existing in relation to itself. Key Words: reality, singular existence, consciousness, self-relation, evolution, relational-matrix model. [M]atrix 2. that within which, or within and from which something originates,takes form, or develops. (Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary) In 1859, Charles Darwin published a book titled “On the Origin of Species.” In that book, Darwin proposed a theory of natural selection or “survival of the fittest” to explain how organisms evolve into different species. This work you’re now reading is a sort of cosmic version of Darwin’s treatise, and could have been titled “On the Origin of Reality,” inasmuch as its purpose is to present a theory that explains how existence evolves into reality. In Darwin’s theory of natural selection, the mechanism underlying organic evolution is mutation. In the theory presented in this book, the mechanism underlying existential evolution is self-relation. Some people are curious about the nature of their surroundings, while others are not. One attitude is ultimately no better or worse than the other; each just leads to different activities. Darwin was no doubt a curious person. I, too, am one of the curious people. Among other things, I’d like to know where I am and how I got here. It would also be nice to know just what “I” really is. Through the efforts of modern science, it’s become apparent that we’re on a planet in a solar system that resides in a galaxy, which itself resides in a Universe full of such galaxies. Science tells us that the stuff which resides in this universe—e.g., the planets, the stars, our own bodies— Correspondence: Steven E. Kaufman, http://www.unifiedreality.com E-mail: skaufman@unifiedreality.com Note: This work was completed in 2001 and is based on my book “Unified Reality Theory: The Evolution of Existence into Experience (ISBN-10: 0970655010)” published in the same year. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 221 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 220-227 Kaufman, S. E. Introduction to Relational-Matrix Model of Reality is composed of energy in the form of matter. Together, all of this energy and matter is called, collectively, physical reality. For the past hundred years or so, physicists have been trying to develop a unified field theory, a theory that would show how all the different forms of energy arise as variations of a single underlying energy or field. In this way, physicists are seeking to account for the whole of physical reality within the unifying context of a single underlying physical reality. So far, they haven’t been successful. Even if they were successful, such a theory wouldn’t account for everything known to exist in the universe, for the universe also contains the intangible, non-physical realities we call awareness and consciousness. In order to satisfy my curiosity, what I wanted wasn’t a unified field theory, not a way of explaining only the physical aspects of existence, but rather, what I wanted was a unified reality theory, a way of explaining both the physical and nonphysical aspects of reality within a unifying context, as the manifestations of a single underlying reality. Being a do-it-yourselfer, I took it upon myself to develop such a theory. This work is the result of that effort. The context within which this unified reality theory is developed is existence in the largest possible sense. In our day-to-day lives, while we encounter countless realities, both physical and nonphysical, all of these realities occur within the context of existence. That is, there are different realities, but what all realities share in common is that they exist. Existence is the common denominator, and so it’s the starting point from which the unified reality theory is developed. Thus, this work is titled Unified Reality Theory because within it I present a model of reality that describes reality as being the manifestation of a singular or unitary absolute existence which has consciousness as an attribute that’s intrinsic to its being. It’s subtitled The Evolution Of Existence Into Experience because this unified model of reality is developed by describing how that absolute existence evolves from a state of undifferentiated consciousness into a differentiated state that is our awareness of experiential reality. The puzzle Constructing a unified model of reality is to some degree analogous to assembling a picture puzzle. The first thing we generally do when beginning to work on a puzzle is get all the pieces out of the box and laid on the table. We then orient all the pieces face up so that we can use the bit of the image on each piece to help connect it to all the other pieces. Next, we usually put together the outer rim of the puzzle first, so as to define the boundaries and provide context for the inner construction. We can then begin to build from the rim inward, or some inner portions may come together easily because their connecting pattern is quite distinct. Eventually, a unified and cohesive picture emerges as we link the individual pieces together into an interconnected whole. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 222 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 220-227 Kaufman, S. E. Introduction to Relational-Matrix Model of Reality The sequence of events in assembling a picture puzzle may vary from person to person; yet there remain basic steps we must take if we’re to eventually come to the point where we’ve completed the picture. Thus, in order to complete the picture, we must first accept that the disconnected pieces in the box represent different somethings which have the potential to come together as a whole. We recognize this potential because we understand that at one time all the pieces existed as a whole which was then cut up, thereby creating the now-separate pieces. Recognizing that all the pieces existed previously in a state of unity allows us to feel comfortable that our effort of reconnecting the pieces will eventually result in their assembly into a completed picture. Likewise, if we’re to undertake the task of constructing a unified model of reality, we must begin with an assumption and an acceptance that the different pieces of reality we have to work with did at one time, in some way, exist in a state of undivided wholeness. Unless we make this assumption at the outset—namely, that what we experience as the apparently separate pieces of reality have the potential to come together in the form of an interconnected, unified whole—then there’s really no point in our taking the pieces out of the box in the first place. The process of existential self-relation According to the unified model of reality presented in this work, the underlying process by which existence has evolved into what we experience as the seemingly separate pieces of reality is really quite simple. That process involves existence repetitively and progressively forming relationships with itself, analogous in a limited way to the repeated and progressive twisting of a rubber band upon itself. A rubber band, as it exists whole and untwisted, represents absolute existence, i.e., existence prior to having formed any relationships with itself. Now, if we take a rubber band and twist it once upon itself, we cause it to form a relationship with itself, and in so doing, we’ve created a level of rubber-band reality. Likewise, when existence forms relationships with itself, what’s created are levels of reality. Reality is what existence becomes when it forms relationships with itself. Thus, reality equals existential self-relation—i.e., reality equals existence in relation to itself. The first twist of the rubber band creates the first relationship of the rubber band to itself. The first twist causes the rubber band to form two relative halves or poles. This first twist is analogous to the first relationship existence forms with itself, creating the first level of existential self-relation or first level of reality. This first level of existential self-relation contains the fundamental relationship that’s the basis of all other relationships existence forms with itself. This relationship, this duality, is implicit in all existential relationships and levels of reality that follow. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 223 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 220-227 Kaufman, S. E. Introduction to Relational-Matrix Model of Reality existence 2nd level of reality 1st level of reality self-relation repeated self-relation evolution of existence into different levels of reality ongoing repetition of self-relation Figure I-1 The fundamental relationship that existence forms with itself to create reality is represented by the T’ai-chi T’u (or yin/yang diagram). Existence evolves into what we ultimately experience as reality as this fundamental relationship is repeated endlessly, creating different levels of reality composed of progressive levels of existential self-relation. The rubber band, no matter how twisted it becomes, remains whole, while simultaneously becoming something in relation to itself, something different that extends and arises from the whole, composed of relationships that the whole forms with itself. The twisted rubber band is still the rubber band, but once it’s twisted, it’s that and something else as well. Likewise, existence, having formed a relationship with itself, is still existence, but it’s that and something else as well, the something else being reality. The more the rubber band is twisted, the more relationships it forms with itself; and the more relationships it forms with itself, the more differentiated it becomes. Yet no matter how twisted the rubber band becomes, it remains always what it is. When existence forms relationships with itself to become reality, the outcome is the same: The more relationships existence forms with itself, the more differentiated it becomes, creating different levels of reality. Yet existence always remains whole, always remains what it is. It needs to be made clear at this point that existence is not, in its absolute state, a physical reality that can be twisted upon itself like a rubber band. The twisting of the rubber band is used as an analogy to illustrate the abstract concept of existential self-relation. However, existence can form relationships with itself, and one result of those relationships is the creation of our experience of physical reality. That is, physical reality is existence, for there’s nothing else; however, physical reality is existence that has evolved into what we experience as physical reality by forming relationships with itself. Thus, existence becomes reality through progressive self-relation. What you’re experiencing now as reality is a relational level of existence, a particular type of existential relationship built upon and resting upon many prior levels of existential self-relation. We are, as we are now, existence that has become very twisted upon itself. This isn’t a bad thing, nor is it a good thing; it’s just what is. More specifically, it’s what is, as it is, in relation to itself. The stages of existential self-relation This process of existential evolution through repetitive and progressive self-relation will be described as occurring through four different stages, steps, or levels, as outlined in figure I. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 224 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 220-227 Kaufman, S. E. Introduction to Relational-Matrix Model of Reality awareness/ experience matter matter matterenergy energy energy energy space-time absolute existence (consciousness) space- spacetime time relative relative existence existence Figure I The basic outline of the stages or levels of reality through which existence evolves to eventually reach an experience of itself. Each set of relationships that existence forms with itself (boxes on right) becomes the next step (boxes on left) in this evolutionary process. Existence in this way evolves by picking itself up by its own bootstraps. When consciousness-existence reaches the top of this evolutionary staircase, it functions as awareness and is able to interact with, and so experience as reality, the levels of existential self-relation through which it has evolved and which now support it. As will be described in detail in this work, the first set of relationships that existence forms with itself creates the underlying framework or relational structure of reality. We experience this relational structure of reality as space-time. Using this first set of relationships as a foundation, existence then forms a second set of relationships with itself. This second set of relationships, occurring within the context of the first set of relationships, results in the differentiation of the relational structure of reality. We experience this differentiation of the relational structure of reality as different forms of energy. Then, using this second set of relationships as a foundation, existence forms a third set of relationships with itself. This third set of relationships, occurring within the context of the first and second sets of relationships, results in the further differentiation of the relational structure of reality. We experience this further differentiation of the relational structure of reality as different forms of matter. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 225 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 220-227 Kaufman, S. E. Introduction to Relational-Matrix Model of Reality As will be described in detail in later parts of this work, the first, second, and third sets of relationships that existence forms with itself allow existence to form a fourth set of relationships with itself. This fourth set of relationships that existence forms with itself consists of the relationships that are responsible for experience itself. It’s through this fourth level of existential self-relation that the other three levels of existential self-relation finally come to be experienced by awareness as reality. As existence evolves by forming these sets of relationships with itself, existence differentiates, but it never becomes divided from itself. As will be described, what we experience as the apparent separability of existence from itself at the physical level of reality is an unavoidable byproduct of the process by which experience itself comes to exist—i.e., it’s an artifact created by the nature of the fourth level of existential self-relation. Hidden simplicity Although reality may be the result of a very simple process, explaining that simplicity to individual beings who experience reality as we do involves some complexity. It’s one thing to make a statement, and another thing to provide evidence that the statement is true. If all that we needed was to state the nature of reality, this work would be exactly one sentence long: “Reality is the result of a process whereby existence repetitively and progressively forms relationships with itself.” But what does such a statement mean? By itself, not much. For that statement to have meaning, it needs context. For any model of reality to be meaningful, that model must be relevant to the reader’s experiences of reality. Our goal in this work is to examine the simple process of self-relation that underlies the evolution of existence into reality, and thereby allow the reader to see beyond the complexity apparent in experiential reality into the underlying simplicity and unity of existence that’s the foundation of reality. If the nature of reality is truly as simple as it’s here being described, as simple as repetitive and progressive self-relation, as simple as twisting a rubber band upon itself, then why has this simple truth remained hidden? Well, just because something is simple doesn’t mean it’s obvious. Underlying simplicity is often obscured by a superficial complexity, or a perspective that introduces complexity. A tree is a relatively simple structure, but if we have only a perspective from above, through the leaves, then that unifying simplicity is hidden from us by the apparent complexity of all the different leaves. Conversely, if we look at the tree from below, from a position of “standing under,” the complexity of the different leaves is then seen within the context of the underlying and unifying simplicity of the trunk, and can then be literally “understood.” Experiential reality is itself the leaves that obscure from view the simple underlying reality of existential unity. Humanity’s approach to understanding the tree of reality through science has generally been from above—i.e., from a position of standing over rather than standing under— viewing and describing reality as it’s seen through the leaves of experience and experimentation. As a consequence, scientific descriptions of reality have tended to become more and more ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 226 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 220-227 Kaufman, S. E. Introduction to Relational-Matrix Model of Reality complex, even though science has uncovered many of the branches that connect the different aspects of physical reality. On the other hand, humanity’s approach to understanding the tree of reality through spirituality has generally been from below—i.e., from a position of standing under—viewing and describing the leaves and branches of reality as they extend from the unity of the trunk. However, in our modern world, dominated as it is by the advancements of science, the approach to reality through spirituality has become unpalatable and unacceptable to many people because it lacks the tangibility and verifiability of scientific experience and also fails, in most cases, to account for what we do know regarding the nature of physical reality. This work has been designed to appeal to both the scientist and the spiritualist, because it integrates the perspective of each approach into a coherent and consistent model of reality. Science and spirituality are two ways of looking at the same tree of reality that has grown out of existence and is composed of existence in relation to itself. The unified model of reality presented in this work merges these two perspectives and thereby demonstrates that the descriptions of reality presented by science and spirituality are not mutually exclusive or opposed, but rather are complementary, because each description arises from a different, yet valid, perspective upon the same underlying existence. The model The idea that the universe consists of existence which has formed relationships with itself isn’t new; Taoists have understood this idea for at least a couple of thousand years. What’s new here is that this idea of the universe being constructed through a process of self-relation is presented in this work in the form of a detailed and defined structural model which, once developed, will be correlated with our current experiences regarding the basis and nature of physical reality, as described by science in general and physics in particular. That structural model, called the relational-matrix model, will be shown to be especially useful in explaining and understanding the basis of some of the more interesting and perplexing aspects of what we experience as physical reality, such as the nature and relativity of time, wave-particle duality, and the speed-of-light constant. In addition to using the relational-matrix model to explain the basis and nature of our physical experience of reality, we will use this model to explain the basis and nature of our mental and emotional experiences of reality as well. On the basis of our experiences, we each have our own ideas about the nature of reality, about the way things are ordered in the universe and, possibly, beyond. In presenting this model of an ultimately unified reality, my goal is to take the reader on a journey from wherever they are with regard to their own ideas about the nature of reality, toward a final destination—to a point where all that we experience as reality can be seen to be inseparable parts of an indivisible, interconnected whole. If we’re to undertake this journey together, we first need to establish common ground, a conceptual base camp, from which the reader can then feel safe in venturing forth into new conceptual territory. In the second and third articles of this work, wherein the relational-matrix ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 227 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 220-227 Kaufman, S. E. Introduction to Relational-Matrix Model of Reality model of reality is developed and related to space-time and physical reality, represents the establishment of such a base camp. Following that, in the fourth article of this work, using the unified model of reality developed in the second and third articles, we will examine the nature of the relationships that are responsible for experience itself. Once the nature of experience has been described, we will then analyze the more nebulous concepts of consciousness and awareness, again using the unified model of reality developed in the second and third articles as the basis for that analysis. In the fifth article of this work, we will also examine the nature of mental and emotional experiences, including their relationship to consciousness, awareness, and the unified model of reality developed in the second and third articles of this work. In this way, we will account for the existence of the three fundamental experiential realities—i.e., physical, mental, and emotional—within an interconnected, unifying framework that shows the relationship of each experiential reality to the other, and of all three to the underlying whole. Ultimately, we will show that reality as a whole can be consistently accounted for only if we understand that the nature of the singular existence from which reality extends through the process of repetitive and progressive self-relation isn’t other than consciousness itself. Thus, we will demonstrate that consciousness doesn’t come into existence at some later stage in the evolution of reality, but rather that the evolution of existence isn’t other than the evolution of consciousness and that experiential reality itself is what comes into existence at a certain stage in the evolution of consciousness-existence. In other words, we will show that consciousness isn’t a product of the machinations of physical reality but, on the contrary, that physical reality, as we experience it to exist, is itself a product of consciousness, albeit consciousness existing in relation to itself. Following certain sections throughout this work, there will be conceptual checkpoints where the most important points made in the preceding sections are reviewed, so that the simplicity of the various concepts presented regarding the nature of reality isn’t lost in the complexity of the statements necessary for their proof. These conceptual checkpoints review the essential concepts that the reader needs to have with them in order to make it to the next clearing, the next level of understanding, regarding the ultimately unified nature of reality as it’s herein being presented. There’s one indispensable instrument that you, the reader, must carry with you at all times when undertaking such a journey. Please take with you an open mind. Without one of these handy, it’s doubtful whether you’ll make it very far. However, if you’re reading these words, it’s more likely than not that you already have one. In that case, take care not to lose it along the way, for the path to our final destination involves many small journeys, and parts of the path may at times seem treacherous and thick with confusion before each new clearing is reached. With that said, let us press on. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 120 Article Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research Dainis Zeps* ABSTRACT Impact of quantum mechanics on physical science epistemology and science at all is considered. We consider methodolically idea that science doesn’t research its assumed objects but the ability to research, thus making itself not distinguishable from the cognitive science in the most general sense. Next idea is that what we discover firstly are the methods and the technologies understanding about which may come (if at all) much much later after we have learned to use these technologies in our life up to incredible level. Instrumentality rather than objectivity should be researched in science. In this sense quantum mechanical impact on sciences should be assessed. Using this key, approach to quantum consciousness should be inquired. Key Words: mathematics, physics, quantum mechanical theories, technologies, cognitive science, motion as cognitive activity. 1. Introduction In the most general sense, our abilities to research we discover when we research nature or whatever else that submits to our inquiries, augmenting in this way our experience to research and gathering it into scientific instruments and methodologies. The more we research, the more we discover our abilities to research and to discover. Whatever research requires much effort from side of researcher, and we know from our experience that the latter exceeds the former in the sense that effort always is required to much more extent to increase the effect. Thus, we may say that to get effect to whatever effort we must develop our abilities. We must recognize this as sort of axiom and actually we know this very well. But why we haven’t developed this simple idea as type of all ambient scientific paradigms with corresponding conclusions? The answer is not trivial: we had to wait until quantum mechanics came to make crucial turning-point and breakthrough in this matter. Why quantum mechanics? We are going to enlighten this insight in this article – we are to come to the paradox: we think that we research nature but we research our abilities to research nature. How it turned that way round? Why it turned that way round? 2. Homo Sapiens Abilities as Prespacetime Human mind always has tended to observe what he perceived first with respect to with what he had perceived. Instrument of observation always took second place with respect to what for instrument was intended. Instrument was built in order to improve ability to perceive. Instrumentality is not first thing in language too, but first come objects and actions. Correspondence: Dainis Zeps, Ph.D., Senior Researcher, Institute of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Latvia, Riga, Rainis av., 29, Latvia, LV - 1459. E-mail: dainize@mii.lu.lv ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 121 This reveals our usual way of thinking, at least on the stage of development we are now. But instrumentality was necessary for us to become conscious beings. If we had to reach new level of development we would need to develop new level of instrumentality for that reason. Let us see sportsman, as example, or by learning new language, or by learning mathematics, or by acquiring whatever new ability. Retreat in instrumentality shows retreat in our aggressivity to develop. Further observation was that we as human beings are too aggregations of instruments to perceive the world around us. We deliberately assumed that world around us exists in some or other way objectivity, as sets of objects, but ability to perceive anything in this world is secondary thing, and the same would mean for us as anatomical aggregations of instruments of perceiving too. If nothing else forced us to chose between instrumentality and objectivity, we did according our state of activity. Tending to be lazy, together with becoming wealthier, we became more materiatistic. Idealist philosophers were first who posed the question – couldn’t be that other way round may be inquired too, i.e., instrument is before observer (1; 2)? But who coould decide who was more right – idealist or materialist, or positivist who tried to find indifferent position between both? That all stood behind philosophy. But the quarrel suddenly had to be solved, at least, what concerned physics. And resolver was quantum mechanics. But we must come to this idea step by step. Physics discovered ways to look into nature more and more deeply. Nature was attacked on several fronts, i.e., using physical experiments, using mathematical methods developed into mathematical physics, using and implementing physics discoveries into technological inventions, optical devices, electricity and radio, all together brought to discoveries of relativity and atomic physics in 20th century and at last to quantum physics. But then homo sapiens suddenly came to awareness that he doesn’t quite understand what he is investigating, i.e., question of what were with reality came before him. Then Max Born discovered interpretation of wave function in quantum mechanics as sort of probabilistic nature of physical observables. To save the same reality, all aspects of quantum mechanical reality was put on its assumed probabilistic nature, but with this almost closing ways to deeper understanding of what had come before physical science actually. But indeterminism wasn’t sufficient. Many interpretations of quantum mechanics came into existence, and all for one and the same reason – to save reality. Did this all save reality? Positivism was some convenient form to postpone the problem of what reality is actually, but only to postpone - not solve. Why we came to face this problem to ask what is reality? Let us step a little back and ask: who said us that we know what all that around do mean for us except that we have given abilities to perceive this within our tentacles, i.e., abilities to perceive? Who said us that we have any means to inquire what reality is? Religions always had said to us that we live within grace of God that had granted all this in order to use it for our benefit and to thank God for it without inquiring where from this all come to us except directing this all as ability of God to grant it all us gratuitous, gratis, in Latin. It turns out that Bible simply warned us beforehand, before quantum mechanics, that all should come to this end just in this way. Actually, we do not know anything except that we have abilities to respond to all what occur in world around us, but become socialized within that to the extent that all around us perceive as reality for our disposal and our intent. From time to time some natural phenomena remind us that we err, say, some seismic activity or sudden illnesses or economic crisis, but otherwise we remain as arrogant as possible. But, if we want to understand what we are to deal with in physical science and sciences at all, we must turn our ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 122 look backwards asking where we firstly lost the objectivity about our positioning with respect to what could be perceived as reality. Starting with Aristotle? Or even earlier (3)? Maybe, but more rational answer might be saying that we are not to blame either Plato, or Aristotle, or Thales, but ourselves: we have erred in the way going forward only taking rational ideas and abandoning whatever we conceived as irrational. Where we came? To quantum mechanics that told us: we did wrongly. We did correctly whenever we developed our abilities, but we did wrongly whenever we assessed wrongly our understanding about what is reality with respect to what is our ability. How quantum mechanics solved the old quarrel? Quantum mechanics itself is aggregation of our abilities: mathematical apparatus developed to extend that gives us insight into depth of nature in way to describe physical experiment with incredible precision. We must mark that quantum mechanics is supported by experimental evidence where this same evidence doesn’t allow to be interpreted otherwise as confirmation of correctness of quantum mechanics without ability to interpret physical reality as would be suitable for our desires to see the reality without quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is paradox for our wishes to see reality otherwise than it is predicted by quantum mechanics. With quantum mechanics we loose ability to follow what is reality, but with it we gain ability to perceive it to the extent we do not need to ask: what is reality itself. But, all these paradoxes are solved in moment we perceive that we are to deal with our ability rather than with our understanding about it what it might mean for us with respect to reality. We gain our ability to much deeper extend if we abandon the wish to ask what stands behind this ability. We gain if we say that ability is primary. To cut ends short we may say that this ability belongs to God. Saying so we gain two-time: we both come to concordance with religions, and we abandon necessity to attribute ability to anything else except God Itself. For atheists, let them invent some other name for God. Before quantum mechanics we assumed to live in space-time, what concerned out understanding of our physical reality. Taking seriously what quantum mechanics requires from us, we must abandon space-time as stage where the phenomenal world is enacted on, moreover, to abandon the space-time completely. We are to come to prespacetime what is perceivable in mathematical setting only and serves for us as incarnation of our abilities to inquire; and this is all. Where is reality? Stay there where you are, being contend with ability to reach this state, but not to go further, because going further means – nonsense. We love too much space-time? Well, use it but without connecting it with scientific inquiry. If you want to base you inquiry on science, you must take as granted that you live in prespacetime, the realm of quantum mechanics. 3. Homo Sapiens as Extension of His Abilities When we come to awareness that our abilities are the reality we live in we can start to apprehend this reality around us. The world we live in is instrumental by nature that consists from sets and aggregations of instruments. The language of this instrumentality may be considered as informational, thus saying that we live in field of information would mean the same or similar thing. Let us know that we live in instrumentality. What in that case is vision? Vision is ability to see and as such it is primary with what we before considered as objectivity, or sets of objects, or aggregations of objects, that all we can seemingly perceive via vision. What is vision – may be answered – it is way of registering what goes on in the world around subject who registers that via vision. The world from part of subject is what can be registered. If we ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 123 build for us a physical picture with the propagating ray of light then instrumental reality may accept only points of departure and arrival of the ray as acts of registering light: the line between points is reconstruction that doesn’t match with reality. We took for granted that light should somehow propagate: now we know – no such ray exists as quantum reality. Notwithstanding we are ready to do all to reconstruct classical picture and “draw light ray” as good approximation for what would seem to us reasonable picture of physical reality. Bohm’s unaccomplished multitime approach allows us to be “scientifically” naughty and prankish in this way, not more, (4). Using quantum mechanical theories we may start to try to build proper picture of consciousness with respect to vision as ability. Really, if we actually could build appropriate mathematical theory that covers sufficiently the ability to see, that may serve as some ground for further “reality” where we live in, we might come to real ground of how to build comprehensive theory of consciousness. We might state even more, physical theories allow us to perceive this “reality” as some field of information that consists from distinctions that comprise one common quantum distinction. See (5), for example. The meaning of these words should determine corresponding quantum mechanical theory, not the philosophy around the play of words. Actually, cone of light is the area where all starts and meets and goes on: light units live for ever there or, more suitably, time notion in traditional setting doesn’t have any sense any more. If light unit starts in one moment of time and reaches goal in other, treating time traditionally, then in referential system of light unit itself these moments are indiscernible, even more, for light unit doesn’t matter where it started and ended – in reference of its proper time these moments are the same, as the same are all its time moments, as the same is time for all cone of light. The start and end points were distinct for the register of the light unit, using traditional physical picture. Let us apply what we said with respect to vision to other areas of abilities of human beings too. Let us apply the same to the language ability, that we use to think and build scientific inquiry too. Speaking about the use of language, we don’t need to wave off spacetime, because the traditional science doesn’t try to connect it with physical reality. Otherwise things turn out when we live in the world of our abilities: language ability comes as something comparable with vision. We gain directly. At last we have come to real world we live in, in the world of our thoughts that is inseparable from other world. Language ability and vision ability, both are closely related, and comprehensive theory of consciousness should take this into account. How to do this? Our experience is rather weak in this direction, but we should hold to what we already have, to experiences to build quantum mechanical theories. See for that Pitkanen (e. g, 6; 7) Let us turn our attention how human body works. The body consists from aggregations of abilities. Most of these abilities are not responsible directly to our commands, say, as moving hands or legs. For example, we can’t directly command how our heart should function or circulation of blood or whatever else in our body. When we speak about these things we are used to describe them as objects, say, heart, liver, kidneys, blood, and so on. But actually we were to speak in terms of their functions, and of functionality. What are objects of this functionality? “Objects” more appropriately might be something collective apparatuses, similarly as we speak already about common sub-consciousness. We already speak about One Man as collective designation of Homo sapiens as reality, as spiritual reality, but maybe sometimes as physical reality too. We should speak about parts of human being too, common human heart or blood system, and so on. These simple considerations say us much about how far we are from real reality when we speak about our individual ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 124 organs, say, heart. What is individual heart of a human being? Ink priests used to cut out human heart from prisoners to sacrifice to gods. Maybe this picture might be suitable? Medical people have to operate with living heart, even if outside human body in time of operation, if dead it ceases to be of any interest for them: the transition is invisible but more actual than any reality. Why this indivisible reality was and still is ignored by science? What we gain from consideration that all around us are rather abilities and their aggregations than aggregations of object? First and main thing is to comprehend that all this consists from one kind of stuff, one kind of “matter” common functionality, that we may call functionality of life. Vision, language, thinking, human body – all is the same, i.e., functionality of life, only on different levels. Taking into account that vision might be considered as functionality of field of information, we might apply this to other levels of our functionality, or, in other words, ontology. We could say in place of ontology – epistemology with the same effect, because all this is with respect of field of information we live in. Quantum mechanical theories would force us to speak about this functionality of life in terms of mathematics. Why? Actually we do not know what this functionality is if taken to some higher levels not accessible to us. But quantum mechanics tells us that we have some access to this functionality, at least to some level of this functionality that we perceive as belonging to mathematics as we understand it today. What is on higher levels we do not know? Swedenborg spoke about language of angels, but this may mean to us only some wink, insinuation, not more, if we want to speak about scientific inquiry. After all, who were who spoke with Swedenborg, persons of future that spoke with him in language of quantum mechanics? Maybe, but it is only some clues to try to connect our past experience with our contemporary experience. 4. The World of Motions and One Common Motion What is functionality of life? Why we may with certainty to speak about it and attribute it to whatever in quantum mechanics? The joining aspect is the motion, see (5; 8). Quantum mechanics turns out to be more comprehensive if considered as description of world of motion and even one common motion, quantum motion that we designated by Motion, capitalizing this word (8). We must remind ourselves that our ancients used this term to greater extent than today contemporary physicists. They, homines of today, use too, of course, notion of motion, but only as some descriptive notion, and with end-used meaning that same as by Greeks, but without direct evidence as other notions, say, particle, waves and so on. For Greeks it was otherwise. Today physicists say: ancients used to speak about motion because they didn’t have other notions as we have today. Actually this is not true. We departed from ancients when we extracted from Plato, Aristotle only rational, abandoning what seemed for us irrational, see (3). So, we have motion from Greeks to the extent of our understanding of rational part of the notion. Cutting short, we use motion mostly in connection with space-time. But quantum mechanics want us to live in prespacetime without space-time at all. We may loose motion together with space-time abandoning space-time? Not in the least extent. Motion doesn’t belong to space-time. That was invention of that back number rationalism that should be abandoned with the era of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics enter new notion of motion, quantum motion, or Motion, in a single word. See (5; 8) Motion (8) capitalized may help us understand why we may gain so much in considering all what concerns our being, ontology, epistemology, as field of information (9). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 125 Motion considered traditionally in contemporary physical theories are commonly considered as something visible, perceivable, in space or time, or both, in phenomenal setting as it is. Motion in general sense, as belonging to prespacetime, would mean much more: it is change in mathematical sense. But mathematics serves only as measuring instrument that fixes, registers the motion, behind what may stand there anything more general. Thus, motion shouldn’t be only mathematical term, though we may capture it only in mathematical settings, what concerns quantum mechanical theory. But, similarly, as experimental equipment may capture change in some assumed “real world” similarly mathematical equipment captures motion in the world that is able to respond to. 5. Homo Technocraticus The new homo sapiens, homo technocraticus, together with the development of technological tools around oneself develop oneself in direction where he get more and more abilities to organize oneself in highly structured society, but the same organizational structure shows how low is his level of understanding of what goes on with himself. Societies which we can remember, from times of Ancient Egyptians, are based on idea that homines sapientes are individual units who so little have in common. Almost nothing turn us to our common ontology, except maybe religious teachings, almost all making us to distinctive individualities. This makes the ground of society and our understanding of the world around as material. What this gives as consequence? Society does not develop otherwise but with brutal revolutions. Wars are fathers of development, according Heraclites. Why? We are divided in our corporal bodies. Christ, other religious teachers, want us to be united? Rationalism and reductionism in science goes its own way. But homo technocraticus or technologicus develops oneself further and further. We have reached some assumed high level with computers and mobile phones. But otherwise, as social units, we are on level of our ancients. Bible for us still is collection of Hebrew tales. If not book of truth it might be at least book of wisdom – but not the case for our contemporary scientists, materialists. We predict end of world, and not without reason, because nothing shows that something would change mind of rationalistic thinking materialist that he is wrong in thinking that he is as separate personality and individuality as separate is his body from bodies of other human beings, actually what isn’t true. But physics still have to come to understanding that separate bodies do not have much sense in the very physical sense. What next? We have come to Paradise what concerns our abilities to produce material values, to perspectives to develop ourselves as homines technologici up to incredible level but without ability to live together due to weak ability to understand where all this we call society is going. What does this say to us as homines technologici? We should turn into priests and advocate for other insights in where could be exit from this deadlock? But, what concerns scientific insight, we may turn attention to simple solution: first it is our consciousness that should be changed, and changed in two ways: first, we should become aware that we are not divided so much as we perceive our bodies. Second: we should apply and develop our theories into way that directly show that we understand where our mind stands. Thus, we should look on consciousness from within and from outside. But, do these pictures differ? 6. Consciousness as Instrument of Building Theorem Windows How we think in mathematics? Do we something different than simply by thinking, (10)? Building mathematical reasoning we use objectivity in form of Motion and reveal its ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 126 invariants and so on. But, when we come to state that we may say that we know what mathematical structure does, we start to exercise something consciously what before we used only unconsciously, indirectly. May it be so that theorem windows we use not only for mathematical reasoning? See (11). However we must say definitely, as certain, “yes” to previous question because we can’t use other way of thinking by mathematical reasoning than by reasoning for other reasons. What sense could have these words? In mathematics the tool and the content doesn’t differ “by stuff they are made from”. And by reasoning we receive the same. When we speak about reasoning as spiritual activity, not material, we don’t turn attention to this coincidence, content and tool, saying, all is spiritual, all is imaginative, all are functions of nerve reactions, as quantum chemistry, but in functional its aspects, not in what could be looked on, or touched by hand, or registered by experimental equipment. When we come to awareness that reasoning is reality, then we should be startled by fact that tools and contend of their actions belong to the same environment. Thus, we come to idea that theorem windows both are tools and structuring elements. Thus now, we have to apply this for field of information where all this is staged on, as before we had space-time as stage for all physical reality. 7. Quartum Organum – Fourth Organon Reality as instrumentality – aren’t we acquainted with such notion? It isn’t right. ? Aristotle gave first us his Organon, in Greek. What does mean in Greek instrument. Next was Francis Bacon, who gave Novum Organum, in Latin. Next was Peter Ouspensky who gave Tertium Organum (2). Now we have order for Quartum Organum, or, , as we like. Who is to announce it? Quantum mechanical age did it by itself. We are only to recognize this fact. We are only to assess things correctly. We have quantum mechanical theories that do this, though, only partly consciously. We have who do this already consciously, see (6; 12). We have approaches which are much ready for this, see (13; 14; 15). We have researchers who inquire directly about these questions, see (16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21; 22; 23; 24; 25). And still more (26; 11; 27; 28; 29; 30; 31; 32; 33; 34) and more (35; 36; 37; 9; 38; 39; 40). We have excellent mathematical and physical theories that are ready for all that, e.g. (17; 41; 42; 43; 44; 45; 46; 47; 48). At last we have more excellent works on general nature for that same task (49; 50; 24). We have quantum mechanics as main hero (51; 52). 8. Conclusion We conclude that quantum mechanics requires us to see physical world rather from side of instrumentality than fixed reality. This may give keys how to unlock understanding of quantum mechanics itself, how to build QM based consciousness approaches, and how to assess history of science and history of society at all. Role of three endeavours, scilicet, of Aristotle, of Bacon, of Ouspensky, to define instrumentality in science should be elevated and praised, and quantum mechanics as new instrumentality – as Fourth Organon – announced. References 1. Berkeley, George. Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. 2. Ouspensky, Peter. Tertium Organum. Key to the Enigmas of the World. In Russian. 1911. 3. Sorabji, Richard. Time, Creation and the Continuum. Theories in Antiquity and the Early Middle ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 127 Ages. : The University of Chicago Press, 1988. 473 pp. 4. Zeps, D. On to what effect LHC experiments should arrive. Riga, 2007. scireprints.lu.lv/37/. 5. Zeps, Dainis. Quantum Distinction: Quantum Distinctiones! Leonardo Journal of Sciences : (LJS), 2009 (8), p. 252-261. Issue 14 (January-June). 6. Pitkänen, Matti. Topological Geometrodynamics. : Luniver Press, 2006. 824 pp. 7. —. p-Adic description of Higgs mechanism I: p-Adic square root and p-adic light cone. : arXiv, 1995. http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9410058. 8. Zeps, Dainis. The Double Rotation as Invariant of Motion in Quantum Mechanics. : Prespacetime Journal, Vol 1, No 1 (2010). prespacetime.com/index.php/pst/article/view/1. 9. —. On functionality of life (in Latvian). Riga : Quantum Distinction, 2009. quantumdistinction.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/dzivibas-funkcionalitate.pdf. 10. —. Cogito ergo sum. bez viet. : Quantum Distinctions, 2008. 11. —. Building Mathematics via Theorem Windows. , 2009. quantumdistinction.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/theorem-windows.pdf. 12. Hu, Huping Hu and Wu, Maoxin. Spin as Primordial Self-Referential Process Driving Quantum Mechanics, Spacetime Dynamics and Consciousness. New York : Biophysics Consulting Group, 2003. 13. D'Aquili, Eugene and Newberg, Andrew B. The Mystical Mind: Probing the Biology of Religious Experience. : Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1999. 14. Dlyasin, G. Azbuka Germesa Trismegista ili molekularnaja tainopis mishelnija. 2002. 15. Prideaux, Jeff. Comparison between Karl Pribram's "Holographic Brain Theory" and more conventional. : Virginia Commonwealth University, 2000. http://www.acsa2000.net/bcngroup/jponkp/. 16. Bohm, David. Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London : Routledge, 2002. 17. Gibbs, Philip. Event-Symmetric Space-Time. : Weburbia Press, 1998. vixra.org/abs/0911.0042. 18. Haisch, Bernard. The God Theory. Universes, Zero-Point Fields, And What's Behind It All. San Francisco, CA : Weiser Books, 2006. 157 pp. 19. Radin, Dean. Entangled Minds. Extrasensory Experiences in a Qauntum Reality. : Paraview Pocket Books, 2006. 20. Steiner, Rudolf. Die vierte Dimension. Mathematik und Wirklichkeit. Dornach : R. Steiner Verlag, 1995. 21. Tegmark, Max. Mathematical Universe. 2007. arXiv:0704.0646v2. 22. Tipler, Frank J. Structure of the World from Pure Numbers. 2008. pp. 897-964. arXiv:0704.3276v1. 23. —. The Physics of Immortality. : Doubleday, 1994. 24. Whorf, Benjamin Lee. Language, Mind and Reality. 1952. pp. Vol. IX, No 3, 167-188. 25. Wigner, E. The unreasonable effectiveness of Mathematics in the natural science. 1960. pp. 1-14. www.math.ucdavis.edu/~mduchin/111/readings/hamming.pdf. 26. Zeps, Dainis. Hologram and distinction. : Quantum Distinctions, 2008. . 27. Zeps, D. Classical and Quantum Self-reference Systems in Physics and Mathematics. Prague : KAM-DIMATIA Series, 2007. 807, 24pp. 28. Zeps, Dainis. Four levels of complexity in mathematics and physics. Riga, 2009. scireprints.lu.lv/1/. 29. —. Mathematics as Reference System of Life: preliminary observations. , 2009. quantumdistinction.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/mathematics-reference-system-life2.pdf. 30. —. Mathematics: Reductionism and Pythagorean Numbers as Reconstruction of Expelled Wholism. (in Latvian), 2009. quantumdistinction.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/matematika redukcionisms.pdf. 31. —. Mathematical mind and cognitive machine (In Latvian). : Quantum Distinctions, 2008. p. 11. 32. —. Inside Outside Equivalence in Mathematics and Physics. , 2009. quantumdistinction.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/inside-outside.pdf. 33. —. Space particle duality. : Quantum Distinctions, 2008. 34. —. The trouble with physics. How physics missed main part of the observer and what comes next. , 2008. p. 9. quantumdistinction.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/troublewithphysics.pdf. 35. —. Trouble with physical interpretations or time as aspect of reference system of life. : Quantum Distinctions, 2008. 36. —. Rudolf Steiner on mathematics and reality. In Latvian. Riga, 2008. p. 7 pp. scireprints.lu.lv/15/. 37. —. On Reference System of Life. , 2009. quantumdistinction.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/on ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 120-128 Zeps, D. Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research 128 reference-system-life.pdf. 38. —. Our abilities to research come before understanding about what we research. (in Latvian), 2009. quantumdistinction.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/musu-spejas.pdf. 39. Zeps, D. Cognitum hypothesis and cognitum consciousness. How time and space conception of idealistic philosophy is supported by contemporary physics. bez viet. : Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, Vol 1, No 1 (2010), 2005. jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/2. 40. Zeps, Dainis. Mathematics and physics is the same. In way of its simplification. Riga : Quantum Distinctions, 2009. 41. Gates, S. James Jr. Superstring Theory. The DNA of Reality. : The Teaching Company, 2006. 42. Huang, Kerson. Fundamental Forces of Nature. The Story of Gauge Fields. Singapore : World Scientific, 2007. 43. —. Quarks, Leptons and Gauge Fields. Singapore : Worlds Scientific Publishing Co Pte. Ltd, 1982. 44. Isham, Chris J. Modern Differential Geometry for Physicists. New Jersey : World Scientific, 2003. 45. Lisi, A. Garrett. An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything. 2007. p. 31. arXiv:0711.0770v1. 46. Marathe, K.B. and Martucci, G. The Mathematical Foundations of Gauge Theories. Amsterdam North Holland, 1992. 47. Jadczyk, Arkadiusz. Quantum Fractals. Geometric modeling of quantum jumps with conformal maps. bez viet. : Advances in Applied Clifford Algebra, 2008. vol 18 (2008), p. 737-754 . 48. Rashewsky, Peter. Rieman Geometry and Tensor Analysis. In Russian. 1967. 49. Tomas, de Kampis. De Imitatione Christi, http://www.ltn.lv/~dainize/inform_theol/IMITATIO_I.htm. 50. Smolin, Lee. The Trouble with Physics. The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science and What Comes Next. : A Mariner Book, 2006. 51. Berezin, F. A. The Method of Second Quantization. Moscow : Nauka, 1965. In Russian, 235 pp. 52. Bohm, David. Quantum Mechanics. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 173 Article The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism Randolph T. Dible II* ABSTRACT The encountering of the experiencer or observer—transcendental subjectivity itself—at the foundation of the world leads inevitably to the recognition of pure objectivity as ultimate reality (which can be taken as its ultimate deconstruction, analogous to the apophatic or via negativa), from which objects derive their value, weight, significance, meaning or objectivity. In this way, pure objectivity can be seen as the supra-self-evident Axiological Axiom, so to speak, even Unconditional Love, in romantic terms. This axiology (value theory) has a structure inverse to the relationship between transcendental subjectivity as the radical unity of pure self-reference and on the other hand, the world of forms, as mere traces (representations, indications) of the unique, original “first distinction” Spencer-Brown speaks of at the foundation of his calculus. That is, all forms (i.e., distinctions, differences) would reduce to being the first distinction, also known as the marked state, which I call penultimate reality (pure self-reference or transcendental subjectivity: the Spirit which animates us), except that forms are complimentary to their content, which is their objectivity or value, which would reduce to the unmarked state or ultimate reality. It is the incongruity of form (thoughts; Whitehead’s “negative prehensions”) and value (feelings; Whitehead’s “positive prehensions,” or my notion of objectivity, meaning and qualia; in short, the non-formal aspects of experience) that holds forms open and keeps them from absolute reduction. This accounts for the brute, concrete persistence of the “functional illusion”-- to use a term from Dzogchen Buddhism-- of the world. Thus this system has an axiology of metaphysical objectivity grounded on the ideal of pure objectivity as the source of all value, meaning and significance, itself the very fecundity of profundity, which is the motive of drawing the distinction in the first place. Key Words: mysticism, perennialism, constructivism, observer, subjectivity, Spencer-Brown, first distinction, axiology, Whitehead, feeling, qualia. 1. Introduction Recent academic research on mysticism is entrenched in an ideological clash between two schools of interpretation of mysticism: perennialism (essentialism, or decontextualism), on the one hand, and anti-perennialism (constructivism, intentionalism, or contextualism), on the other. The former upholds the universality of the mystical experience, while the latter takes it to be—like any other human experience, they say— completely conditional. I will begin by explaining what ‘mysticism’ means. I will then proceed to define and illustrate the two schools of interpretation— perennialism and anti-perennialism—by the arguments of their representative pupils. My point is that the two schools of interpretation commit the disjunctive fallacy, or the fallacy of exclusive alternatives. Then, assessing the relation between mystical experience in practice, and systematic metaphysical theory, I will propose process philosophy (i.e., from Heraclitus to Peirce and Whitehead) as a framework for the debate, and my theoretical solution. In the end, upon reviewing two strong alternatives called, respectively, a “Middle Way” (Jackson, 1989), and a “middle ground” (Forman, 1993), I will suggest my own metaphysical understanding which is akin to the proposed alternatives to perennialist and anti-perennialist interpretations of the purity of mystical experience. Correspondence: Randolph T. Dible II, Senior Student, Department of Philosophy, SUNY at Stony Brook, NY E-mail: mostconducive@origin.org . ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 174 2. Mysticism Anthony Flew defines mysticism as “direct or unmediated experience of the divine, in which the soul momentarily approaches union with God.” (Flew, 1979.) The 2005 Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy states that mysticism is the “Belief in union with the divine nature by means of… the power of spiritual access to ultimate reality, or to the domains of knowledge closed off to ordinary thought.” Religious scholar Ninian Smart proposes that mysticism is “those inner visions and practices which are contemplative.” (Smart, 1978.) The problem with this is that although contemplation may characterize mystical practice and tradition, the essentially mystical experience is itself characterized by a quietude or peace contrary to contemplation, of the essence Robert Forman refer to (with minimal stipulation) as the “pure consciousness experience.” In Smart’s characterization we find the constructivist bias. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article “Mysticism” by Jerome Gellman is taken from his chapter in The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion, “Mysticism and Religious Experience”. Here is Gellman’s definition: “A (purportedly) super sense-perceptual or sub sense-perceptual unitive experience granting acquaintance of realities or states of affairs that are of a kind not accessible by way of senseperception, somatosensory modalities, or standard introspection.” (Wainwright, 2005.) More specifically, the English philosopher Walter Stace (1886 – 1967) distinguished two universal mystical states found “in all cultures, religions, periods, and social conditions.” These two are the extrovertive and introvertive paths to “the unitative experience of the One.” While the former achieves unity by going out through multiplicity looking “outward through the senses”, the introvertive, ‘monistic’ experience “looks inward into the mind,” to achieve “pure consciousness” devoid of phenomenal content. Both achieve ‘Oneness’ as “sacred objectivity.”1 3. Perennialism The term philosophia perennis was first popularized by Leibniz, who took it from the sixteenth century theologian Augustinus Steuchius’ 1540 work. Steuchius used it to describe the “originally revealed absolute truth made available to man before his fall, completely forgotten in that lapse, and only gradually regained in fragmentary form in the subsequent history of human thought.” (Ibid.) Leibniz used it to describe what was needed to complete his own system. He called it “an analysis of the truth and falsehood of all philosophies, ancient and modern” by which on would “draw the gold from the dross, the diamond from its mine, the light from the shadows; and this would be in effect a kind of perennial philosophy”. (Thackara, 1984.) As an ideal aim, the ‘perennial philosophy’ has a more universal history. For instance, in speaking of the existence of the soul after death, the Roman statesman Cicero stated that he had the authority of all antiquity on his side when he said “these things are of old date, and have, besides, the sanction of universal religion”2. Alexandrian inspirer of Plotinus and the Neoplatonic movement, Ammonius Saccas (third century CE), had a similar goal of reconciling different religious philosophies.3 Rennaud Fabbri’s article “Introduction to the Perennialist School” says “the ideal of such a philosophy is much older, and one can easily recognize it in the Golden Chain (seira) of Neoplatonism, in the Patristic Lex primordialis, in the Islamic Din al-Fitra or even in the Hindu 1 Ibid. ‘Objectivity’ here means not merely the objectivity that the ordinary sensorial-phenomenal objective world objects have, but in contrast, more like the objects of universal truth of mathematics and logic, verities eternally true in all possible universes. This notion is perhaps best phrased “pure objectivity,” what one would expect the transcendental ultimate reality to consist of. It is formless objectivity. It is an ideal state, which is not to say it isn’t also real, even immanent in material reality. Later, I will show how such a notion completes my proposed solution in a metaphysics similar to the ‘Objective Idealism’ of Peirce and ‘Organic Realism’ of Whitehead. 2 Thackara, 1984: quoting from Tusculan Disputations I.12-14. 3 Thackara 1984. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 175 Sanathana Dharma”4, although this last connection has been the subject of debate between Swami Vivekananda (an Advaita Vedantin) religious scholars, like Fritjof Schuon and Georg Feuerstein. Also as an ideal aim, the great logician and father of Pragmatism Charles Sanders Peirce, in the Introduction to his Principles of Philosophy5 expressed his outline of “a theory so comprehensive that, for a long time to come, the entire work of human reason, in philosophy of every school and kind, in mathematics, in psychology, in physical science, in history, in sociology, and in whatever other department there may be, shall appear as the filling up of details. The first step toward this is to find simple concepts applicable to every subject”6. As an ideal rather than a product, “a perennial philosophy has never been formulated in complete detail and with final perfection”7. The ordinary usage of the term ‘philosophia perennis’ or ‘perennial philosophy’ does not necessarily indicate an ideal aim, although that may be implied, but instead it tends to indicate an end product, a school of thought unifying the disparate religions, seeing their differences as mere surface feature, most pronounced in mysticism. Constructivists will dispute the actuality of ideal states, wisely suggesting that claims of actually experiencing pure or transcendental states of experience, consciousness or being are not empirically verifiable, in the ordinary sense, certainly not in the sense naturalism or empirical science (and metaphysically, materialism) seeks. But mystics recognize that there is a higher validation which cannot be represented, for if merely represented, articulated or expressed, looses its meaning. This validation is that of being it, rather than merely seeing it. It is called “Knowledge Through Identity,” but what it is knowledge of is not anything that can be called an object, but rather, the very objectivity that is manifested in all objects. It can be called a certainty, perhaps, but in any case it is a circumstance that needs to re-enter academic discussion for a better appreciation of the purity of mystical experience, and to be explicit of its place in the hierarchy of knowledge. This later need is sought by metaphysics in its ideal aim beyond the material. In recent times, Aldous Huxley’s 1945 book The Perennial Philosophy popularized this pole of interpretation called “perennialism” for the public, in the name of that title. Huxley called this the ‘Highest Common Factor’ “which is not only of divine inspiration and origin, but shares the same metaphysical principles”. (Fabbri, 2009.) Before Huxley’s popularization of the term, French author Rene Guenon (1886 – 1951) wrote at length about the Sophia Perennis (Eternal Wisdom,) or Primordial Tradition. Guenon has inspired Fritjof Schuon (1907 – 1998) as well as the Ceylonese scholar Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877 – 1947), who are also considered founding members of the esoteric Traditionalist school of perennialism of the interwar period. Huxley called this the ‘Highest Common Factor’ “which is not only of divine inspiration and origin, but shares the same metaphysical principles”.8 Before Huxley’s popularization of the term, French author Rene Guenon (1886 – 1951) wrote at length about the Sophia Perennis (Eternal Wisdom) or Primordial Tradition. The ensuing school of thought is called ‘Traditionalism’, although the basic tenet of Traditionalism is that it is immemorial and found in all ‘authentic traditions’, and has much in common with the ancient Hindu Sanatana Dharma (Eternal Doctrine.) Guenon has inspired Fritjof Schuon (1907 – 1998) as well as the Ceylonese scholar Ananda Coomaraswamy (1877 – 1947), who are also considered founding members of the esoteric Traditionalist school of perennialism of the interwar period. Following Guenon’s view, Traditionalists add to perennialism the view that modern civilization is “a pseudo and decadent civilization which manifests the lowest possibilities of the Kali Yuga (the dark age of the Hindu cosmology)”9, and they add the necessity of 4 Fabbri, Renaud, http://www.religioperennis.org/documents/Fabbri/Perennialism.pdf. Peirce, C. S., Collected Papers, 1931-1935. In this quote Peirce is advocating a metaphysical system more than mysticism per se, but it shows Peirce’s perennial ideal aim. 6 Ibid., I, vii, Section 1 7 Leomker, Leroy, 2003 8 Fabbri, Renaud, http://www.religioperennis.org/documents/Fabbri/Perennialism.pdf. 9 StateMaster Encyclopedia entry on the ‘Traditionalist school,’ http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Traditionalist-School. 5 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 176 an initiatory spiritual path found in a traditional religion. The necessity of participating in a religious tradition was emphasized in Schuon’s adaption called ‘Religio Perennis’. Anti-perennialists will dispute the achievement or actuality of ideal states, wisely suggesting that claims of pure or transcendental states are not empirically verifiable, in the ordinary sense, certainly not in the sense naturalism or empirical science (and metaphysically, materialism) seeks. But mystics recognize that there is a higher validation which cannot be represented, for if merely represented, articulated or expressed, looses its meaning. This validation is that of being it, rather than merely seeing it. It is called “Knowledge Through Identity,” but what it is knowledge of is not anything that can be called an object, but rather, the very objectivity that is manifested in all objects. It can be called a certainty, perhaps, but in any case it is a circumstance that needs to re-enter academic discussion for a better appreciation of the purity of mystical experience, and to be explicit of its place in the hierarchy of knowledge. This later need is sought by metaphysics in its ideal aim beyond the material. 4. Constructivism In the context of the contemporary scholarly studies of mysticism, ‘constructivism’ denotes the conceptual and cultural (and religious and cognitive-linguistic) context (or construction) of the mystical experience. It could also be called pluralism or contextualism. The tendency of constructivists, or anti-perennialists, is to avoid the perceived problems with perennialism’s conflation of religious views, which is good, but by claiming that mystical experiences differ from context to context, which misses the essence of the mystical experience as an ideally unconditioned experience of pure consciousness or subjectivity itself. More precisely, anti-perennialism, going by the name of “constructivism,” profits from “a contemporary paradigm shift in epistemology toward the view that there are no human experiences except through the sociolinguistic relations which mediate them”. (Forman, 1990.) Representatives of mystical constructivism are Steven Katz, Robert Gimello, Hans Penner, and Wayne Proudfoot (Forman, 1993.) Katz’s basic and repeated claim is that “there are NO pure (unmediated) experiences”. (Katz, 1978, 1983.) In the words of secular-religiousstudies pioneer Ninian Smart, “experiences are always in some degree interpreted: they as it were contain interpretations within them. No perception can be quite neutral.” (Smart, 1978.) The general argument for mystical constructivism is that all experience is constructed, involving at least some concepts, which are themselves determined by the sociolinguistic and cultural context, among a myriad other factors, and so mystical experiences must differ from context to context, and mystic to mystic. Stephen Katz has focused on “the pre-experiential conditions of the mystic’s circumstance and how this experiential pattern informs the resultant experience.” (Katz, 1978.) These are noble causes, assuming there is no access to the transcendental, or that mystics don’t generally have that access. The essential problem with this view is that it appears true, and for the descriptive or interpretive or even just the expressive level (for all practical purposes) it is true, but it implies that there cannot be that sort of purity ever achieved in the world, by a meditator or whatever. Furthermore, that assumption is found to be true when analyzing it with the gross tools of thought stationed in the world, to which we are accustomed. The meditator’s goal is to refine the understanding of the world and its constituent thoughts (the mind) enough to come into contact with, or to realize what was already there: the transcendentally unique ‘empty set’ of “experiences,” sometimes identified with the true Self, pure subjectivity. Of course, interpretation is contextual, but mystical experience is supposed to be an attempt at decontextualization in direct, unmediated experience, with the goal of a state of ‘pure’ content-less (and so context-less) experience. Robert Forman has developed this idea and calls it a “pureconsciousness event” or experience (Forman, 1990.) The “pure-consciousness event” is an alleged emptying out of all experiential content and phenomenological qualities. (Gellman, 2005.) Constructivists have argued that ‘pure-consciousness events’ are impossible because of “the kinds of beings that we are” (Katz, 1975). One should certainly suspect the possibility of idealization of the purity of the experience, in the sense that it may mislead us. Certainly, defenders of the ‘pureISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 177 consciousness event’ may be exaggerating their claims, although this does not discount the possibility of PCEs. Furthermore, the meaning of “pure consciousness events” may depend on one’s definition of consciousness. The founder of the phenomenological movement Husserl, for instance, denies the possibility of consciousness not of anything—unintentional consciousness is impossible, he says—all consciousness is intentional.10 My conclusion regarding mystical constructivism (or pluralism) is that it is certainly relevant at the descriptive and interpretive level, when discussing mysticism in general. Its historical appearance was necessitated by the rampant epistemological naiveté and academic irresponsibility of the overwhelmingly perennialist mystical literature. The worst problem with certain influential pieces of perennialist literature was their uncritical (to say the least) representation of original sources. They distorted the translations to make them seem identical. “For example, in Mysticism East and West, Rudolf Otto misrepresented Shankara and transformed Meister Eckhart into a sort of Shankaran NeoPlotinus. Huxley quoted little bits and pieces from one mystic after another, making them all something like Advaitins…. Perennialists lost what differentiates these great traditions.” (Forman, 1993.) But constructivism has its own problems. That mysticism is essentially conditioned by sociolinguistic concepts is an assumption. In Katz’s words, “There are NO pure (i.e., unmediated) experiences.” It is essential to the meaning and import of mysticism that there are indeed pure, unmediated, unconditioned experiences, and furthermore it is as verifiable in direct experience as possible. Meditation is the compliment of mediation, and the attenuation of mediation by concentration is the essential characteristic of meditation. The clash between the Perennialists and Anti-perennialists is a clash between apriori worldviews: the ageless debacle in understanding, the communication breakdown between the Absolutists and relativists. 5. Ko-i, “Marching Concepts” Roger R. Jackson’s article “Matching Concepts: Deconstructive and Foundationalist Tendencies in Buddhist Thought” (Jackson, 1989) deals primarily with a polarity within Buddhism between the technique of deconstructive analysis, and foundationalism. But it begins with the Chinese concept called ko-i which came from 1st and 2nd century C.E. translations of Indian religious and philosophical ideas into Chinese. When the cultures first met, there were many foreign religious concepts, so terminological equivalents were sought, and some seemed intuitive. Of course, there were major problems with these first series of translations, such as the translation of dharma as Bodhi (“enlightenment”) and even yoga into Chinese as tao, and nirvana was translated as wu-wei, “nonaction.” (Ibid., 561.) This style of translation was called ko-i, “matching concepts.” This is a common phenomenon, says Jackson, when cultures meet. It can be extended to the assimilation of Eastern philosophy into Western, for instance, Jackson points out the existent interpretations of the Buddha through David Hume and William James, Nagarjuna through Ludwig Wittgenstein, Dharmakirti through Immanuel Kant and Williard Quine, Tantrism through Heidegger, and Zen through Eckhart. (Ibid., 562.) Of course, this is relevant to the perennialist position, from a critical standpoint of pluralism. Deconstruction is a technique more than an ideology, a technique “to expose the ideological underpinnings, the limitations, the illogic of all thought and interpretation.” (Ibid., 564.) Its critical purpose is to “deflate the certainties to which human thought… is prone.” Jackson acknowledges that foundationalism is not necessarily a target of deconstruction, but he says that it does “seem to form a natural polarity with deconstruction, to which its assumptions are diametrically opposed.” (Ibid.) It assumes that it is both necessary and possible to ground the construction of human 10 There are other terminological issues—with regards to philosophical stipulations on consciousness, experience, existence etc.—which seem moot points, and often the stipulation of transcendental or pure experience is simply that it is to be taken as the limit case or boundary conception of the term. It may also be that the term consciousness is too loaded for faithfully meaning what the mystic intends. Pure consciousness may be criticized as pure unconsciousness, proponents advocating awareness, but either way, a purification of one’s own being is implied. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 178 knowledge on firm epistemological or ontological foundations. A foundation itself needs no support, though it supports all other beliefs. It presumes that certain beliefs are either self-justified or irrefutable. (Ibid.) Examples of foundations in the Western philosophical tradition are given as Platonic forms, Cartesian “clear and distinct ideas” and the Thomistic God. Without these foundations, knowledge lacks certainty, but deconstruction has the advantage, says Jackson, of not requiring dubious certainty. “…foundationalism… in the West [has] generally been grounded in some ontological or epistemological absolute, such as Being, or the Cogito, or some transcendental subject.” (Ibid., 566.) Buddhism, however, says Jackson, has “a non-absolutist foundationalism” based on perception and inference which doesn’t grant absolute certainty, but objective certainty. This distinction in Jackson’s understanding of Buddhism is relevant to the foundationalist tendencies within perennialism generally. Perennialism tends to be of the “absolutist foundationalism.” There is a sense in which deconstruction is to foundationalism as mystical constructivism is to perennialism, but we have to keep in mind the stipulations of these terms—i.e., our use of constructivism and Jackson’s use of deconstruction are not opposed, but are both representative of anti-perennialism. The really relevant point in “Matching Concepts” is Jackson’s negotiation of these two poles in his understanding of Buddhism. He identifies his method with the Buddhist “middle way” of avoiding extreme views. “Poles” is the metaphor he employs when speaking of Buddhism generally, but he has a notion of “frames” for the differing particular positions on the spectrum within Buddhism. These frames refer to “whether it is primarily a deconstructive enterprise that is framed by foundationalism, or a foundationalist enterprise framed by deconstruction.” (Ibid., 567.) Deconstruction however, is simply a technique, insists Jackson, not an ideology, so rather than being a position, it may employ a temporary perspective, but as a technique for “exposing the incongruities inherent in any position,” it is called a “meta-position,” although it must be admitted to be a “position” in some meaningful sense. (Ibid.) Jackson’s conclusion is that in Buddhism, the two poles must be balanced via the “Middle Way.” “The innermost frame… tends to be the “strong foundationalist” assertion of worldly and religious conventionalities…. That frame is surrounded and sublated by a wider frame that involves… the ultimate deconstruction of those conventionalities.” (Ibid, 584.) That frame, in turn is surrounded by a still wider “weak foundationalist” frame, and its ultimate deconstruction involves conventional foundations themselves deconstructed, and so on. It would seem that this process leads to philosophical and spiritual frustration, but, argues Jackson, the philosophical and spiritual failure is in “the attitude that would seek finally to resolve the deconstruction-foundationalism polarity in favor of one or the other.” (Ibid., 585.) The metaphor he ends with is that of the Buddhist who must walk a difficult tightrope, “balancing two truths, holding a pole weighted deconstructively on one end, and foundationally on the other, knowing that if her equilibrium is lost, the fall will be a long one. As long as both are under her control, however, passage will be possible and the goal—which is no goal, but a goal nevertheless—will be attained.” Jackson adds that in many Mahayana traditions, a Buddha is defined by his or her ability to balance the two truths. This is Jackson’s take on the Buddha’s middle way: “…one of Buddhism’s most basic metaphors is that of holding to a middle between extremes, whether of hedonism and asceticism, eternalism and annihilationism, or, simply, “is” and “is not.”” (Ibid.) Jackson’s view is a suggestion to balance deconstructionism and foundationalism in Buddhism, but his elaborate framework has a simpler analog in my brand of process metaphysics. The analogy only reaches so far, as Jackson calls his position “non-absolutist foundationalism,” and mine is more in the Whiteheadian vein of absolute idealism on a realistic basis (Process and Reality, pp. xiii), or Peirce’s objective idealism (The Architecture of Theories), wherein the real is no less ideal. 6. Mysticism and Metaphysical Systems When viewing mysticism generally, one may be struck by a distinction between mystical traditions which involve meditation and practice an economy of just enough content in experience to achieve no content (content-less consciousness, Forman’s “pure consciousness event”), ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 179 characterized by religious and ascetic practices, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the more philosophical mysticism from the likes of Plotinus, Bradley and Schopenhauer, and even more broadly construed, idealist metaphysical systems from the likes of Parmenides, Plato, Spinoza, and Peirce. The explanation of the details of such mystical traditions and metaphysical systems is a project beyond the scope of this investigation, but I can argue that the distinction between these two categories is merely that of praxis and theory, stemming from a common motive: either the “pure consciousness event,” or something like it. Mysticism and idealist metaphysics, generally construed, are not different. The Buddha had his theories, and Descartes had his meditations. Jackson’s metaphors of informed frames and the Buddha balancing on a tightrope may be a solution to the two schools of interpreting mystical experience, and Forman’s solution called “Tirtha”—which will be discussed in the next section— may be a “middle ground” perspective of both perennialism and constructivism. But perhaps the metaphysical formulation of these metaphors is best construed in the framework of process philosophy. I suggest this because process, based on events rather than entities, or actions rather than atoms, is an ontological category (that of becoming, which accounts for being) which already encompasses opposites, extremes, and has the power to understand contradictions. 7. Tirtha In Robert Forman’s 1993 Sophia article, “Of Deserts and Doors: Methodology of the Study of Mysticism”, he presents these two views—perennialism and constructivism—and critiques them both in a “plea for the recognition of differences, but only where there are differences”, and offers the possibility of a third alternative, a middle ground which he names Tirtha (from Sanskrit, ‘passageway’ or ‘crossing place’), after the Hindu temple doorways through which one gains access to the gods, but also leaves the temple for the desert outside. In Forman’s theory, “tirtha” means a passageway or crossing place at the entry or exit to a Buddhist temple, and this door-frame is akin to Jackson’s frames. But rather than a balance between biases in endlessly deconstructed foundations, Forman proposes a “middle ground” perspective on the mysticism debate. “Our Tirtha, threshold, stands between the closed room of constructivism and the borderless desert of perennialism.” (Forman, 1993, p. 40.) This alternative recognizes that mystical experience centered on the ‘pure consciousness event’ shows no signs of being constructed, but recognizes also that the processes leading up to it are completely inter-dependently originated in their contextuality. Assuming the existence of what is meant by ‘pure consciousness event’, this seems to be the best view. Forman argues for the existence of the pure consciousness event on the grounds of its universality or uniqueness: “…this new approach allows for the possibility that cross-culturally parallel descriptions of pure consciousness may actually refer to cross-culturally parallel experiences. For without content, there is no particular feature or characteristic to distinguish two experiences…” (Ibid., 41.) This latter point is reminiscent of the unique and singular existence of the ‘empty set’ in mathematics. The assumption of the existence of pure experience is the key assumption, which cannot be demonstrated, but only proven as a super-self-evident axiom, that is, proven only after one has “had” or “become” the experience or event in question. This kind of higher knowledge, beyond sensually-mediated experience (and Forman suggests it is even beyond inference,) has been called “Knowledge through Identity”. (Forman, 1999, Merrell-Wolff, 1973.)11 Its evidence is so pervasive we can’t help but overlook it, for it is us in our own being—we don’t see it to know it, we be it to know it. That direct, first-hand knowledge which cannot be transmitted second hand is not the exclusive knowledge of elite meditators, but is the ultimate reality, which is always already the case, just as the metaphysical intuition of the Infinite12 is necessary to grant signification to the finite. 11 Spencer-Brown also seems to suggest it as the difference between “being” and “seeing being,” in the AUM conference transcripts, 1973. 12 Guenon distinguishes ‘the metaphysical Infinite’ from ‘the mathematical Infinite’ by simply referring to the former as the Absolute Infinite, because, he says, the mathematical Infinite is often the merely indefinite countability of otherwise finite beings (Guenon, 2003.) In recognizing the uniqueness of this Absolute Infinite, I ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 180 Of course, calling it ‘Objectivity in Itself’ presumes there being some form or formless sort of subjectivity, and certainly there seems no escape from the perspectivity of subjectivity, as Descartes found(ed.) But this alternative interpretation of mystical experience (Forman’s Tirtha) can demonstrate, for philosophical inquiry, that there is indeed an exit, via the Tirtha or temple doorway between the constructed building or temple, and the desert outside, the unmarked state. Next we will look at my “threshold.” Rather than a metaphorical doorway, my metaphysical exodus from the perennialist-constructivist debate is a metaphysical structure—not a structure as in a building, but only a foundation, a corner-stone: more precisely Being is taken to be SpencerBrown‘s “first distinction,” which is the crossing to the beyond of being (epekenia tes ousia,) and it is deconstructed, erased, or crossed, just like Jackson’s frames, and Forman’s Tirtha, but precisely, Spencer-Brown’s forms.13 Every frame is formed and every form framed; this is the doctrine of the unmarked cross. Although the play of signifiers (percipience, perspection, or perspectivity), is endless, Pure Subjectivity is the exit and the entry, the end and the beginning. 8. Tarati Independent of Forman’s Tirtha, I have come to a foundational metaphysical position which has resisted my attempts at deconstruction over my years of philosophical study. This system is a process metaphysics which accounts for the genesis of multiple realities, orders, levels or dimensions, distinct from the unique ultimate reality, by analogy to the way Spencer-Brown’s Laws of Form accounts for the genesis of forms and time from the “unmarked state.” This structure can be articulated, beginning with the first principle, the One, the source, and cannot be so articulated beyond that, ‘before the beginning’ so to speak. The One or Being In-Itself, in this system, is the dimensionless point construed as pure self-reference, formless subjectivity, and the transcendental signifier. The ultimate is the transcendental signified in my system-- pure objectivity, or objectivity without an object-- and it is the beyond of being, epekeina tes ousia. It can be either pure and radical nothingness (which is impossible) or the Absolute Infinite, and it cannot be articulated or actualized without passing through the penultimate to get to the non-ultimate or conditional-conventional universe of discourse. This metaphysical system takes the ultimate reality of the Infinite-- to express one such articulation of it-- as an axiom. This is an axiom not in the sense of ‘self-evident,’ for there is no Self or One ultimately (this system takes the Self or One to be merely penultimate), only the reality beyond itself (beyond the qualifier ‘In-Itself,’) and is therefore called ‘Supra Self-evident.’ In fact, it can only be known to be the Infinite, rather than pure nothingness, by deciding on the “essence” of “the beyond of being.” For all purposes which may concern us (on this side of being, i.e., within the realm of finite being), the “beyond of being” can only “be” one of two “things” or satisfactions of our conceptual understanding: either 1. Pure and radical nothingness, for we can imagine nothing more possibly ultimate, or, since that cannot be, 2. A “beyond of being” which overflows our determination of it as “beyond being”, and becomes Being in the first place, but immediately ensues as everything else. This latter notion is the Absolute Infinite, in a process metaphysics. The starting point of this foundational system is this pen-ultimate reality, taken as the very Principle underlying other metaphysical notions of ‘first principles’, as well as the differentiations of the Peircian class of Firstness, and even Whiteheadian novelty, and it is known (insofar as it is said to be ‘known’) by ‘Knowledge through Identity’ (Merrell-Wolff) which is unmediated, but meditated, so to speak. This foundational core is likely what Descartes meant to know, but claimed to think; that ‘I strive to imagine the Infinite as the overwhelming or overflowing nature of the beyond of being—epekeina tes ousia—from which Being bootstraps itself into existence, in the first place. After all, it seems to me, ultimate reality must either be pure and radical nothingness (which is impossible) or the Absolute Infinite. 13 Spencer-Brown, George, 1969, Laws of Form. The work itself is far beyond the scope of this work, and densely mathematical, metaphysically similar to the system of Peirce, and idealist to the core. Often taken as the kernel or nucleus of systems theory, and as a calculus of mystical mathematics, Laws of Form has largely unexplored metaphysical implications, but adopted by this author nonetheless. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 181 am’. It is what Kant couldn’t quite come to accept, however close he came to Pure Subjectivity in his architectonic. It is from Kant that Schopenhauer came to his realization of what he calls “the subject of subjectivity,” a phrase from Kant’s writings, as the Vedantic Paramatman. I could call this system, following the style of Forman, ‘Tarati’ which is Sanskrit for ‘he crosses’, a term taken from George Spencer-Brown siblinghood for teaching the “consequences of there being nothing at all” (Laws of Form) implied in his calculus of indications (the very same structure as structure as “codependent origination,”14 pratitya samutpada) of ‘the First Distinction’ (which, I’ll add, is metaphysically, Difference In-Itself as much as Being In-Itself). I identify it with Pure SelfReference, or Pure Subjectivity, for the purpose of technically elucidating how multiplicity arises from Unity. 9. Conclusion Ultimate Reality is the beyond of being, which overflows its own boundlessness to found all finity, starting with pure subjectivity— or pure self-reference which is Being in Itself, transcendental Unity, which I therefore call penultimate reality—the original and originary Difference In-Itself, from which all differences in the multiplicity of any construct have their meaning and significance as forms of indication or reference (traces of the first distinction), and to which they all ultimately simplify. I do not attempt to de-center Western ontology, but place the philosophy of Presence-as-Being within a philosophy of Becoming or process, which distinguishes that which is given in the present, from the very Presence of the present. This latter notion is what is meant by my use of Spencer-Brown’s “first distinction,” I suggest. The First Distinction is also called “the cross” as it is read, in an injunctive language (a process, like a recipe, or a machine language) rather than a descriptive language (a “natural language,” a product of human communication,) as an instruction to cross itself (the act of drawing a distinction or making a difference) out, thereby erasing itself. By this ontological erasure, the notion of the “first distinction” can be read as a deconstructive tool and foundational event, likening it to Jackson’s frames, but it is the basis of Spencer-Brown’s forms. In short, the encountering of the experiencer or observer—transcendental subjectivity itself—at the foundation of the world leads inevitably to the recognition of pure objectivity as ultimate reality (which can be taken as its ultimate deconstruction, analogous to the apophatic or via negativa), from which objects derive their value, weight, significance, meaning or objectivity. In this way, pure objectivity can be seen as the supra-self-evident Axiological Axiom, so to speak, even Unconditional Love, in romantic terms. This axiology (value theory) has a structure inverse to the relationship between transcendental subjectivity as the radical unity of pure self-reference15 and on the other hand, the world of forms16, as mere traces (representations, indications) of the unique, original “first distinction” Spencer-Brown speaks of at the foundation of his calculus. That is, all forms (i.e., distinctions, differences) would reduce to being the first distinction, also known as the marked state, which I call penultimate reality (pure self-reference or transcendental subjectivity: the Spirit which animates us), except that forms are complimentary to their content, which is their objectivity or value, which would reduce to the unmarked state or ultimate reality. It is the incongruity of form (thoughts; Whitehead’s “negative prehensions”) and value (feelings; Whitehead’s “positive prehensions,” or my notion of objectivity, meaning and qualia; in short, the non-formal aspects of 14 This technicality is beyond the scope of this paper, unfortunately. I refer interested researchers to Laws of Form, and Spencer-Brown’s other writings. 15 In this system, once again, the One or the Self is “penultimate reality”, the center and source of the world, analogous to the Origin in an extensive continuum or Cartesian co-ordinate plane, from which any extensive point of reference (or any form, or frame of reference) receives its value, meaning and significance from the formless, dimensionless point of pure self-reference, the first difference of the system. 16 Form is here taken in the sense of George Spencer-Brown’s Laws of Form: “We shall take… the form of distinction for the form”; that is, form precisely as that which is comprised of distinctions. The Laws of Form is a calculus of indications of the first distinction based on two simple axioms which govern the consequences of just having drawn a distinction in an otherwise unmarked state. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 182 experience,) that holds forms open and keeps them from absolute reduction. This accounts for the brute, concrete persistence of the “functional illusion”-- to use a term from Dzogchen Buddhism-- of the world. Thus this system has an axiology of metaphysical objectivity grounded on the ideal of pure objectivity as the source of all value, meaning and significance, itself the very fecundity of profundity, which is the motive17 of drawing the distinction in the first place. This is my foundational theory, inspired by the metaphysical implications of George SpencerBrown’s Laws of Form, specifically his calculus of indications of the first distinction (the laws of form themselves, expressed as two elegant axioms) interpreted as the very precise mathematical formulation of the Buddha Sakyamuni’s doctrine of codependent origination or mutual co-arising of form. I also extend it to Whitehead’s metaphysical system from Process and Reality (Whitehead, 1929, 1978)—although Whitehead does not speak of transcendental subjectivity or transcendental superjectivity (the term for objectivity in his system) — and I take “form” to mean Whitehead’s notion of “subjective form”, for the Spencer-Brownian form of distinction is the activity of distinguishing, the injunction to cross the distinction,18 and the process Whitehead identifies with “the experiencing subject itself” (Ibid., p. 16.) The subject, or pure subjectivity, is also an ideal aim of meditation, the “pure consciousness” of Asamprajnata Samadhi. Hence, ‘pure subjectivity,’ in my formulation, is to be construed as the formless boundary case or limit-concept of the Whiteheadian “subjective form” or process, conforming with Whitehead: “Process is the becoming of experience.” (Ibid, 166.) It is no mere coincidence that Forman uses the Sanskrit for “to cross beyond”, Tirtha, and Spencer-Brown uses the Sanskrit for “to cross”, Tarati, to designate a metaphysical system each feels to be complete, for the first distinction is identical with the act of drawing it up, and once enacted is erased (deconstructed). My formulation is original, but I adopt Spencer-Brown’s term in this context as a metaphysical analogue of Forman’s proposed middle ground, Jackson’s ‘frames,’ and in my indebtedness to the structure of Spencer-Brown’s calculus. References Fabbri, Renaud. “Introduction to the Perennialist School.” Religioperennis.org. Religio-Perennis, n. d. Web. 5 October 2009. URL: http://www.religioperennis.org/documents/Fabbri/Perennialism.pdf. Flew, Anthony, 1979, “A Dictionary of Philosophy,” New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1979. Forman, Robert K. C. Ed. “The Innate Capacity.” New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. ---. “Mysticism, Mind, Consciousness.” Albany: State University of New York Press, 1999. ---. “Of Deserts and Doors: Methodology of the Study of Mysticism.” Sophia. Vol. 32, No. 1. (1993): pp. 31-44. ---. “Paramaartha and the Modern Constructivists on Mysticism: Epistemological Monomorphism versus Duomorphism.” Philosophy East and West. Vol. 39, No. 4 (1989): pp. 393-418. ---. Ed. “The Problem of Pure Consciousness.” New York: Oxford University Press, 1990. Gellman, Jerome I. “Mysticism.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2004): Web. 11 November 2004. ---. “Mysticism and Religious Experience.” Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion. Ed. Wainwright, William J. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. 138-167. Guenon, Rene. “The Metaphysical Principles of the Infinitesimal Calculus.” New York: Sophia Perennis, 2003. Horowitz, Maryanne Cline. Ed. “New Dictionary of the History of Ideas.” New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2005. Huxley, Aldous. “The Perennial Philosophy: An Interpretation of the Great Mystics, East and West.” 17 “There can be no distinction without motive, and there can be no motive unless contents are seen to differ in value.” Spencer-Brown, 1969, p. 1, Ch. 1. This would be circular reasoning were Laws of Form not a process metaphysics. This interpretation, the metaphysical implication of it, inspired my axiological theory. 18 i.e., the distinction is nothing else than the crossing: all else is mere indication, mere traces, mirror reflections. For representational purposes, the crossing of a boundary is its erasure. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 173-183 Dible II, R. T. The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism 183 New York: HarperCollins, 1944. Jackson, Roger R. “Matching Concepts: Deconstructive and Foundationalist Tendencies in Buddhist Thought.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion. Vol. 57, No. 3. (1989): pp. 561-589. Katz, Stephen T. Ed. “Mysticism and Language.” New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. ---. Ed. “Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis.” New York: Oxford University Press, 1978. ---. Ed. “Mysticism and Religious Traditions.” New York: Oxford University Press, 1983. Kimmel, Monica. Interpreting Mysticism. “An Evaluation of Stephen T. Katz’s Arguments Against a Common Core in Mysticism and Mystical Experience.” Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Gothenburg, 2008. Mahoney, Timothy A. “Contextualism, Decontextualism, and Perennialism: Suggestions for Expanding the Common Ground of the World’s Mystical Traditions.” Twentieth World Congress on Philosophy. Boston, Massachusetts. 10-15 August 1998. Paiedia Project On-Line, n.d., Web. Merrell-Wolff, Franklin. “Pathways Through to Space.” New York: The Julian Press, Inc., 1973. ---. “The Philosophy of Consciousness Without an Object.” New York: The Julian Press, Inc., 1973. Peirce, C. S. The Architecture of Theories. Buchler, Justus (Ed.), “Philosophical Writings of Peirce.” New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1955. Schopenhauer, Arthur. “The World as Will and Representation.” New York: Dover, 1966. Smart, Ninian. “Understanding Mystical Experience,” pp. 12, in Katz (ed.), Mysticism and Philosophical Analysis, 1978. Spencer-Brown, George. “Laws of Form.” Germany: Bohmeier Verlag, 2008. Steuchius, Augustinus, De philosophia perenni sive veterum philosophorum cum theologia Christiana consensus libri X, 1540. Stoeber, Michael. “Theo-Monistic Mysticism.” New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994. Print. ---. “Constructivist Epistemologie; Mysticism: A Critique and a Revision” Religious Studies. Vol. 28 (2001): pp. 107-116. Thackara, W. T. S. “The Perennial Philosophy.” Sunrise Magazine, April/ May 1984. Web. 05 October 2009. Whitehead, A. N., “Process and Reality.” London: McMillan, 1929. Corrected Edition. New York: The Free Press, 1978. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

770 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 770-772 Smith, S. P. Review of Charles T. Tart’s Book: The End of Materialism: How Evidence of the Paranormal Is Bringing Science and Spirit Together Book Review Review of Charles T. Tart’s Book: The End of Materialism: How Evidence of the Paranormal Is Bringing Science and Spirit Together Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT Tart believes that the big five, his referral to telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, psychokinesis, and psychic healing, are well supported by scientific evidence. Tart reviews this evidence, but wants to go to the next step: to consider other paranormal phenomena, and to look at the issue of what these phenomena mean in a philosophical sense (his best bet). You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/End-Materialism-Paranormal-co-publishedInstitute/dp/1572246456/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: materialism, paranormal, telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, psychokinesis, psychic healing, science, spirit. Tart confronts this issue of belief and knowledge, and how we humans struggle with meaning. He (page 25) writes: "Things that we believe that we don't know we believe, though, are like a set of chains. They just automatically affect our perceptions and thoughts, and trap us." Tart (page 34) writes: "If you don't consciously see that you have competing, clashing views of something, it won't feel as if you have a conflict. But, at a deeper, psychological level, your psyche is not whole when you do this; the conflict will exact a price from you on less-conscious levels." This struggle is most apparent in a misplace certainty given to a science turned scientism, with materialistic philosophy at its core. Tart (page 37) writes: "Scientism has uselessly hurt enormous numbers of people, and we must distinguish scientism from science if we want any hope of science and spirituality helping each other." Tart (page 38) writes: "Until we learn to distinguish essential science from scientism, we remain vulnerable to false invalidation, which seems to have the full power and prestige of science behind it but is really an arbitrary, philosophical opinion. And we lose the ability to constructively apply essential science to increase our understanding of and effectiveness with spirituality." Tart (page 67) writes: "pseudoskeptics aren't actually skeptics in a genuine sense; they're believers in some other system, out to attack and debunk what they don't believe in while trying to appear open minded and scientific, even though they're not." Tart continues: "Various media love to report in these controversies stirred up by pseudoskeptics, and usually give the pseudoskeptics high, expert status and make the arguments sound serious, either because (1) the people running a particular reporting medium are themselves pseudoskeptical, committed to scientific materialism, (2) as cynical media people have put it for decades, controversy sells more newspapers than accurate reporting, or (3) both." Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 771 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 770-772 Smith, S. P. Review of Charles T. Tart’s Book: The End of Materialism: How Evidence of the Paranormal Is Bringing Science and Spirit Together Tart (page 192) writes: "Try to always notice when I write [scientism] rather than [science]. A major aspect of my personal identity is being a scientist and thinking like a scientist, and I consider science to be a noble calling that demands the best of me. I want to use genuine, essential science to help our understanding in all areas of life, including the spiritual. Scientism, on the other hand, is a perversion of genuine science. Scientism in our time consists mainly of a dogmatic commitment to a materialist philosophy that dismisses and [explains away] the spiritual, rather than actually examining it carefully and trying to understand it." Among the various accounts of paranormal phenomena presented by Tart, there is one interesting account of an out-of-body experience (OBE), where a hidden number is revealed (page 204): "The number 25132 was indeed the correct target number near the ceiling above here bed. I had learned something about designing experiments since my first OBE experiment, and precise evaluation was possible here. The odds against guessing a five-digit number by chance alone on one try are hundreds thousand to one, so this is a remarkable event! Note also that Miss Z had apparently expected me to have the target number propped up against the wall behind the self, but she correctly reported that is was lying flat. She had also hoped to pass through the wall or closed door and see a second target number in the control room, but could not do so." Tart (page 226) describes Dennis Hill's near-death experience (NDE), and quotes Hill: "There is a sudden rush of expansion into boundaryless awareness. I feel utter serenity infused with radiant joy. There is perfect stillness; no thoughts, no memories. In the rapturous state, free from the limitations of time and space, beyond the body and the mind, I have no memory of ever having been other that This." And Tart (page 229) speculates: "If NDEs were nothing but hallucinatory experiences induced by a malfunctioning brain as a person dies, as materialists want to believe, then we would expect great variation from person to person, and the qualities of experience would be largely determined by the culture and beliefs of each person experiencing the NDE. Instead, we have great similarity across cultures and belief systems, arguing that there's something real about NDE rather that its being nothing but a hallucination." Tart (page 246) takes a materialist rejection of after-death communication, and turns it into an absurd darkness: "I personally find the materialistic idea quite depressing - an admission that, to materialists, will simply show that I have neurotic hopes and lack the courage to face the facts. If I believed that there's no hope of any kind of survival, I would adapt as much as possible by becoming more normal in this materialistic age. That is, I would show excessive concern for my health, promote research that supports health and increases our life spans, and avoid taking any unnecessary risks that might endanger my health or my life, while otherwise trying to maximize my pleasure and minimize my pain. Psychologically, I would try not to think about the depressing reality and finality of death, would work on distracting myself with constant pleasurable pursuits, and if the above steps weren't enough, to find a doctor who would prescribe mood-altering medications so I wouldn't feel depressed." Tart (page 291) provides a neat summary: "When we look at paraconceptual phenomena in detail, in the science of parapsychology we find, grouped for convenience, two categories. Group one, the big five - telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, psychokinesis, and psychic healing - are psi phenomena whose existence is supported by hundreds of rigorous experiments for each phenomenon. Group two, the many maybes, are phenomena that have enough evidence that it would be foolish to simply dismiss them as unreal, but not enough evidence, in my estimate, to make them foundation realities for further research as the big five are. The many maybes that we've surveyed in this book (which certainly aren't all of them) are postcognition, out-of-body experiences (OBEs), near death experiences (NDEs), after-death communications (ADCs), and postmortem survival in some kind of afterlife as primary evidenced through mediumship and reincarnation cases." ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 772 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 770-772 Smith, S. P. Review of Charles T. Tart’s Book: The End of Materialism: How Evidence of the Paranormal Is Bringing Science and Spirit Together Tart (page 291) continues: "The big five paint a picture of humans as being who are more than just their physical bodies, beings who can sometimes communicate mind to mind, sometimes clairvoyantly know the state of the physical world, sometimes predict an inherently (by physical laws) unpredictable future, sometimes affects, for the better, other biological systems, as in psychic healing. Traditional spiritual systems in general tell us that ordinary, physical life is only part of reality; there's a larger, more encompassing spiritual reality beyond the ordinary space, time, and embodiment, and the big five can readily be seen as glimpses of mind operating in this larger reality." Tart is describing "the end of materialism," as the evidence he brings forth supports his best conclusion (page 310): "My current best bet is that there's a real spiritual realm, as real or perhaps even more real (in some sense that's hard to understand in our ordinary state of consciousness) than ordinary material reality. My current best bet is that this spiritual realm has purpose and is intelligent and loving in some profound sense. My current best bet is that our human nature partakes of this spiritual nature. The deep experience of many mystics that are one with all of reality, including spiritual reality, is about something vital and true. The several psychic ways we occasionally connect with each other (telepathy) and the material world (clairvoyance) are partial manifestations of this inherent connection with all of reality, spiritual as well as material. References Charles T. Tart, 2009, The End of Materialism: How Evidence of the Paranormal Is Bringing Science and Spirit Together, New Harbinger Publications. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

547 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Article Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics †‡ Massimo Cocchi*, †Lucio Tonello, †Fabio Gabrielli, §† Massimo Pregnolato & ∫†Eliano Pessa † Institute "Paolo Sotgiu" Quantitative & Evolutionary Psychiatry & Cardiology, L.U.de.S. Univ., Lugano, Switzerland, Via dei Faggi. 4, Quartiere La Sguancia CH – 6912 Lugano Pazzallo ‡ Dept. of Med. Veterinary Sciences, Univ. of Bologna, Via Tolara di Sopra 50, 40064 Ozzano dell‟Emilia, Bologna § Quantumbiolab, Department of Drug Sciences, University of Pavia, Viale Taramelli, 2I, 27100 Pavia ∫† Department of Psychology, University of Pavia, Piazza Botta n° 6, 27100 Pavia Abstract Biology and culture, consciousness and the world, subject and object, inner and outer have continuity and find, in the "creative transcendence” of consciousness and its experiences, a privileged degree of understanding. The aims of this paper are: (1) to stress the validity of the phenomenological approach to consciousness and the subsequent interpretation of memory, expression of the “ego” as a continuous narrative of “self”; (2) to show that a molecular structure, such as tubulin, can effectively modulate the state of consciousness through the changes that occur within it; (3) to formulate a plausible hypothesis about the existence of different levels of consciousness in animals; (4) to introduce a hypothesis concerning the involvement of membrane viscosity and serotonin as regulatory agents in different levels of consciousness such as mood disorders and hallucinations. It is suggested that consciousness persists even in the face of minimal conditions, perhaps even in traumatic brain injuries. Such a suggestion is justified at the bio molecular level through introduction of the hypothesis that Schrödinger proteins (i.e. tubulins) are the biological interface from quantum to classical computation, underlying quantum/classical consciousness processes and at the crossroad of memory and learning capacities. Keywords: intentional consciousness, animal consciousness, cell membrane viscosity; Gsα protein, tubulin. Consciousness: a phenomenological interpretation Each consciousness is intentional consciousness, "consciousness of", "look towards" a world, whether it be, of "naked thing" or matter of sense and evaluation, says Husserl (Husserl 1950). Consciousness, therefore, performs the work of unmasking, finalized to the evidence of the world, to its explanation (zu den Sachen Selbst). Any experience to which we refer is always an experience of something that is in the world, caught in its flow, into the living embodiment of its things that are "here for me, they are within my reach [...] whether I am paying or not paying attention to them, whether or not I take care of them in my thinking, in my feeling, in the will "(Husserl 1950). * Correspondence: Professor Massimo Cocchi, Dept. of Medical Veterinary Sciences, Univ. of Bologna, Via Tolara di Sopra 50, 40064 Ozzano dell‟Emilia, Bologna. E-mail: massimo.cocchi@unibo.it ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 548 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. In short, consciousness is "life that experiences the world", the world-of-life, of lived experience (Lebenswelt): at the beginning there is the intuition, the perceptive and bodily dimension of feeling, moving, observing, real previews of the subsequent theoretical time. The origins of objective science send back to the world-of-life, of the original evidence, of the lived experience, pre-logical, constantly experienced, whose "peculiar scientificity” founds the same logic-theoretical science, its logical meaning located underneath experiencing. Every process of abstraction, idealization, scientific research, each of its historical senses starts from that original pre-science construction that is, precisely, the Lebenswelt, the world of life, the real life of consciousness intuitively immersed in the history of a world not yet objectified, theoretical. The world-of-life is the beginning, (the “Vergessenes Sinnesfundament der Naturwissenschaft”) (Husserl 1954) of any scientific question; categories and scientific instruments should not emphasize their strangeness, their formalism with respect to reality, but must constantly nurture the relationship with it. In the Paragraph of the Krisis entitled “Die positivistische Reduktion der Idee der Wissenschaft auf bloße Tatsachenwissenschaft. Die “Krisis” der Wissenschaft als Verlust ihrer Lebensbedeutsamkeit” (“The positivistic reduction of the idea of science to the idea of a science of facts. The 'crisis' of science as a loss of its meaning for life) reports: “The mere facts of science create mere men in substance (Bloße Tatsachenwissenschaften machen bloße Tatsachenmenschen)”. Husserl‟s thought wants to remind science not to confine the knowledgeable world, in a material way, because, by doing so, those problems that are the most pressing for man, who, in our restless times, feels at the mercy of fate; it would exclude "on principle"; the problems of the meaning or meaninglessness of human existence as a whole (die Fragen nach Sinn oder Sinnlosigkeit dieses ganzen menschlichen Daseins)”, that is, those issues that "relate to man „s behavior towards the surrounding human and non-human world, man who must freely choose and who is free to rationally model himself and the world around him. What should this science say on reason and unreason (Vernunft und Unvernunft), what should this science say about us, human beings as subjects of this freedom (Menschen als Subjekte dieser Freiheit)”? All sciences, the Geisteswissenschaften also, seem to confine themselves up in their specialized fields and fences, within a substantial factualism which rejects as unscientific, or even as antiscientific, irrationalistic, the essential problems concerning freedom, reason, happiness, and the sense of life. Consciousness, in other words, has a transcendent active character (Merleau-Ponty 1945) of understanding of the existing: consciousness "takes along" (cum-prehendere) itself and the world not as a mere factual but intentional registration (tension of consciousness with the object of giving it a soul, to make it understandable). The conscious awareness on itself and the world is not limited to a "path with an intended destination" (Erfahrung), that is, the difference between subject and object with verification by the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 549 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. first of what is true or false in the second, but configures, primarily, as an experienced inclusion of the object in the transcendence of consciousness (Erlebnis). Fruitfulness of the phenomenological approach to consciousness If we assume that consciousness, ab origine, is intuitive, a vital look on the world, its perceptions (biologically related to tubulin and to the cell membrane viscosity) will not be simple facts, but lived concreteness. The man would say Hidegger (Heidegger 1977) as human being - in the world (In-der Welt-sein) has a relationship with his ways of being and with other lives (Binswanger 1946). Well, this lived, perceived, internalized concreteness, could be retained by tubulin as a mnemonic expression of consciousness, to configure the man as a continuous narrative, that is, as always active consciousness, even to minimal levels, oriented to continuously stitching and mending itself. An English study, however, has found "evidence of consciousness", that is, responses to stimuli, albeit in a small percentage, in patients who have suffered traumatic brain injury (Monti 2010). The uninterrupted narrative of self is embodied in the memory, understood as a succession of experienced feelings, thoughts, events, otherwise unrelated, that is, as openness to the sense (Nietzsche 1958). Locke himself, who didn‟t found the personal identity in a vertical direction (metaphysical continuity of the individual) but in a horizontal one, recognized, specifically in memory, the thread capable of stitching together, and then connecting, all the events of our lives, even being aware that memory, which is open to the sense, but also to the 'implosion of every sense, that is to say death (Galimberti 1999), is an expression of human frailty (according to a line of thought that from Locke and Hume reaches Parfit or Dennett). This so fragile self, according to Ricoeur (Ricoeur 1990), is idem identity, continuity of the same (méméte) and ipse identity, narrative identity; permanence in time, topographic identity and dynamic uniqueness, ever renewing itself; formal identity, substantial, "be himself" statically, and dynamics that keeps faith in herself as a promise, and that tells its action without interruption, under a language that has a pragmatic force (Austin‟s locutionary and illocutionary acts) and not just a semantic one. Right in the illocutionary force, Ricoeur (Ricoeur 1999) finds the notion, dear to the personalist tradition, of commitment and self-esteem, "where at the level of semantics the person was only one of the things in respect of which we speak, at pragmatic level the person is immediately designated as self, to the extent that the speaker designates himself every time that specifies the illocutionary act in which he engages his word.” Here we are at the heart of the person and of the so-called personism: mind - body relationship, typical of analytic philosophy, should be replaced with the person-body relationship, because the world and the person belong to different ontological geographies. In other words, the physicalism, according to which every object is made by and reducible to physical analysis should be replaced by the phenomenology (De Monticelli 1995; De Monticelli 1998; Rudder-Baker 2000). In this context, consciousness is conceived as a "creator of reality": it would be interesting to deepen, in a phenomenological sense, some quantum models of consciousness (Herbert 1987; Hameroff 1998; Hameroff 2007; Hameroff and Penrose 2003; Stapp ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 550 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. 1999), starting, for Stapp, from the affirmation of Von Neumann, claiming that the universe is the objective result of subjective observational states. Consciousness levels Recently it was shown (Cocchi 2008; Cocchi and Tonello 2010) that, according to the molecular parameters investigated in humans (platelet fatty acids), by which it has been possible to obtain a classification of the depressive disorder (Cocchi 2010a, b), in some animals can be found the same bio-molecular characteristics evidenced for human depression (Cocchi 2009d). This finding led to a reflection on the state of consciousness about human psychiatric condition and has, once again, raised the quaestio of consciousness in the animal world. The acquisition that consciousness is a fundamental element involved in psychiatric illness (Cocchi 2010c) creates a fertile ground to identify the mechanisms that, through various experiential activities, lead to an hypothesis of molecular approaches to psychiatric illness, with a possible “continuous” between cell membrane viscosity, protein Gsα and Tubulin. To provide a precise definition of consciousness is not easy, however. Personal thoughts, theories and behavioral experiments on humans and animals, have involved many intellectual resources with the intent to understand whether the animals have consciousness or not and which kind of consciousness in comparison with man. In recent decades the progress of the biochemical, molecular and quantum computation knowledge has, in recent decades, has allowed the opening of hypotheses that have shown chinks of light on the delicate and complex problem of consciousness. A strong proposal, not yet fully shared by the entire scientific community, has been put forward by Penrose and Hameroff with the Orch OR Theory. It‟s the first time that consciousness is substantiated and is part of a biological domain, opening, in fact, to a complex series of researches aimed to find links and connections between the cytoskeleton and the molecular expression of the cell, which involves membrane viscosity, Gsα protein and tubulin. We believe that consciousness is a complex system, interactionist and organismic, in which the parties can be explained only if they refer to the whole. In detail, the ordinary states of consciousness or ego can be represented as a set of communicating levels (Figure 1): 1. Pure biological level or primordial ego: the proto self of Damasio (Damasio 1999), attributing in a rudimentary form to his own ego, feelings of hunger, thirst, pleasure, pain; 2. Bio-eco-logical level: on the conscious interaction between subject and environment, but set only the “hic et nunc” with no extension project. 3. Extended mnemonic level: belonging to a consciousness that, while expanding “back and forth, "does not yet embody in a language its being continuous narrative, preserved by the memory as a place of meaning of life. 4. Level of identity sense: from its original roots in biology the ego has gradually expanded to the ecological dimension or mnemonic short-range, is then passed to the mnemonic longhaul dimension, and now, through language, produces an accomplished culture. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 551 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. 5. Mysteric level of consciousness or abyss of consciousness (Cocchi et al. 2009). The presence in humans of a prophetic intuition, of an abyss of consciousness opens the way for intellectual freedom as liberation from the outer limits (subject, "obstacles" to overcome in pursuit of their projects) and internal (indefinitely biological determinism or panbiologism). In other words, the ego produces articulations of sense about himself and the world that incorporates into his experiences and his acting out, in a narrative, intellectual and emotional, irreducible to any other, world views, social stress, scientific and cultural expressions. Altered states of consciousness (ASC) are states of consciousness that differ significantly from baseline or ordinary consciousness. ASC are brain states wherein the sense of identity with one's body or with one's normal sense of perceptions, is lost. The ASC can be achieved through trauma, sleep disturbance, sensory deprivation or sensory overload, neurochemical imbalance, epileptic seizure, or fever. They may also be induced by social behavior, such as frenzied dancing or chanting and may be induced by electrically stimulating parts of the brain or by ingesting psychotropic drugs (Vailt 2005). Man is rooted in biology, but does not solve it in its entire existence. In short, it is reductionist to identify the personal self in a simple chain of neurons or, in other words, to explain the mind, and thus indirectly the soul/consciousness, only on neural basis: e.g. on neuro-psychoanalysis and on Freud old dream of reducing the mental to the neural, see the contributions of Heinrich (Henrich 2010) and Semenza (Semenza 2010). On the other hand is, obviously, ontologically nonsensical undock the ego from his flesh, from its biological dimension. There is, in short, a carnal “self”, but also a “self” whose nature is immaterial, a-quantum, mysterious, chaste guardian of freedom and openness to a transcendent sense: "On the idea of soul we must say the following. To explain what it is, would be task of a divine exposure in all directions, and long; but, to say what it looks like is a human exposure, and relatively short“. (Plato, Phaedrus, 246 A it. tr. G. Reale; see also Heraclitus, fr. 45; compare also the intuition of Heraclitus' logos, which increases itself: fr. 115 and the pace of the Platonic Phaedo, 99 A-B). In light of the above, we believe that consciousness is in memory that makes itself language and narration, the identification process for excellence, which cultural or existential nature intercepts,in tubulin its biological marker, the sign of continuity between biology and culture. In this context, as can be inferred from the subsequent molecular biology argument, the dialectic among tubulin, brain and synapses, governed by serotonin, could be the privileged herrmeneutical key to determining the different levels of states of consciousness. In our case, the animal consciousness (Dennett 1996; Griffin 1992; Wilder 1996; Bekoff and Allen 1997; Gozzano 2001) could be incorporated at the pure organic and bio-eco-logical levels. Bekoff (Bekoff 2002; Bekoff and Peirce 2009) even believe that the animals show a wide range of moral behavior, including sense of justice, empathy, trust and reciprocity: a hypothesis that would lead us to an even higher level of consciousness, to the extent that morality would be understood as an evolutionary trait that humans share with other social mammals. Quaranta et al. (2007) argue, on the other hand, that the lateralization, appeared before language, is not just a prerogative of man but also of very different organisms (i.e. dogs). Mascalzoni et al. (2010), studying the chicks (chicken), concluded that in the brains of vertebrates there is an innate ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 552 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. neural mechanism underlying the recognition of animate objects (along with physical causality, the distinction between animate and inanimate objects constitutes a kind of Kantian genetic a priori). Accordance with these studies, depening the concept of “animal potential memory", one could hypothesize a sort of proto level of animal consciousness (extended mnemonic proto level). Figure 1. Fig 1. Description of consciousness levels Even in the world of plants one could speak of a first level of consciousness. Tryptophan, in fact, together with some plant intermediates (oxygen and reduced cofactors), forms serotonin: the role of all these is to ensure the utilization of light, essential for life (Azmitia 2001). In fact, as a proto-self exists in animals and humans, linked to the fulfillment of basic living needs (hunger, thirst, pleasure, pain), so there is a sort of pre - proto-self plant, expression of the dialectic-tryptophanintermediate substances-serotonin-light, which guarantee a biological life. Serotonin, with all its dynamics, would thereforeconstitute the principle of identity of the plant: the plant lives because the serotonin guarantees the light. In other words, you could also split the pure biological level: - primordial consciousness plant or pre-proto-self - primordial animal and human consciousness or proto-self. The Spinoza conatus sese conservandi, the power that every natural expression has to expand its power, in primis the existence, is therefore, trasversal to the whole nature and seems to impose itself as an original marker of consciousness in its original announcement, that is, to say from and in the very moment we start talking about that. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 553 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Quantum Consciousness The definition of consciousness is not universally shared, even worse is the definition of quantum consciousness. For the purposes of this study is very useful the Efstratios Manousakis approach which describes the nature as grounded on the framework of the operation and on the primary ontological character of consciousness, rather than describing consciousness as grounded on the laws of physics. The word consciousness usually means “experienced awareness”. A person is “conscious” or “has” consciousness if he is experiencing a “flow” of conscious events. The stream of consciousness consists of the conscious events that constitute this stream. Manousakis supposed that all human beings and the other living organisms have their own streams of consciousness and postulated the existence of the Universal/Global stream of consciousness, as the primary reality that contains all of our individual streams. Therefore, he postulates the primary ontological status, the oneness, and the universality of consciousness. The term “oneness” means that there is only one stream of conscious flow with various sub-streams, the individual streams of consciousness, such as those which we are experiencing as human beings, but all connected to one Universal conscious flow (Manousakis 2006). According to Stuart Hameroff: “Consciousness involves phenomenal experience, self-awareness, feelings, choices, control of actions, a model of the world, etc. But what is it? Is consciousness something specific or merely a byproduct of information processing? Whatever it is, consciousness is a multi-faceted puzzle. Despite enormous strides in behavioral and brain science, essential features of consciousness continue to elude explanation” (Hameroff 2006). We need, at this stage, to spend some words about the reasons which induce us, and many other researchers, to choose quantum theories as the main conceptual framework to model consciousness phenomena. These reasons have been already discussed in detail way by many authors, such as, for instance, Penrose (1994). However, without entering into technicalities, we should help biochemists, physiologists, philosophers and clinicians to understand the convenience of using very abstract and mathematically difficult theories (such as the quantum ones) to account for phenomena whose macroscopic features are, after all, easily accessible to everyday observations. This convenience stems from the following considerations: 1) all physical phenomena underlying consciousness are based, at the microscopic level, on the behaviours of molecules, atoms and elementary particles; the latter, as evidenced by more than one hundred years of experimental research, must be described in quantum terms; 2) only quantum theories allow the existence of robust global coherence effects (Anderson and Stein 1985; Umezawa 1993; Vitiello 2001); the latter have been observed in a huge number of cases, scattered among all scientific disciplines (consciousness phenomena are highly representative in this regard) and generally difficult to accounting for by resorting to traditional classical physics; within the latter, of course, coherence effects are allowed, but they cannot be robust, being strongly dependent on initial conditions, special arrangements, and like; moreover, they are subjected to an unavoidable decay dictated by the laws of classical thermodynamics. These reasons must not induce us to forget that the actual state of quantum theories is far from being perfect. Namely the latter have been initially formulated with the purpose of describing only simple atomic phenomena. Their application to biological processes is, thus, still marked by a ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 554 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. number of conceptual and technical difficulties (Pessa 2008). However, the findings, so far obtained, point to a increasingly better integration of quantum theories within the world of biological modelling. In the last decade many theories and papers have been published concerning the biophysical properties of Microtubules (MTs) including the hypothesis of MTs implication, in coherent quantum states in the brain, evolving in some form of energy and information transfer. A plausible motive force for objective collapse in the brain needs to be identified, and it is conceivable that MTs or the tubulin subunit, that compose them, have something to offer to this concept. Tubulin, acting as qubits that communicate with one another via quantum entanglement induced by physical interactions, performs quantum computations that would be influenced by synaptic activity, and other neuronal conditions, to orchestrate the collapse that gives rise to cognitive events. MTs and Actin filaments can be viewed as computationally relevant nanowire networks that operate within neurons providing the connection of the cell nucleus with the postsynaptic density interactome (Woolf et al. 2010). Potential computational modes for MTs and actin filaments are beginning to be understood, with two main quantum models proposed for MTs information processing. The Hameroff-Penrose model (Hameroff and Penrose 1996) which suppose that quantum-superposed states develop in tubulins, remain coherent and recruit more superposed tubulins until a mass-time-energy threshold, related to quantum gravity, is reached up to 500 msec. (Libet et al. 1979). In figure 2 is synthesized how the quantum mechanisms of unconsciousness are processed to reach the conscious mind. Fig 2. Consciousness and Unconsciousness. The unconscious, endowed with global knowledge, (the truth-observable) is rich enough to originate creativity. Quantum information is processed by the unconscious and then is made available to our conscious mind as classical information. (From Hameroff and Penrose 1996: modified) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 555 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. This model predicts dendritic webs of approximately 100,000 neurons for discrete conscious moments, or frames, occurring every 25 ms in gamma synchrony (Hameroff and Penrose 1996). More recent is the Craddock and Tuszynski model which describes classical and quantum information processing in MTs based on a double-well potential in the interior of the tubulin dimer. (Craddock and Tuszynski 2010; Craddock et al. 2009). Within each dendrite‟s cytoplasmic interior, microtubules are connected by microtubule-associated proteins. Many possible fine-scale processes e.g. electromagnetic fields, calcium ion gradients, molecular reaction–diffusion patterns, actin sol-gel dynamics, glycolysis, classical microtubule information processing, and/or microtubule quantum computation with entanglement and quantum coherence can extend through gap junctions. Networks of gap junction-linked neurons (and glia) have been termed hyper-neurons (John et al. 1986). Thus, dendritic integration webs may unify, on a brain-wide basis, fine-scale processes comprising consciousness. Gap junction circuits of cortical interneurons in adult brains mediate gamma EEG/coherent 40 Hz and other synchronous activity (Dermietzel 1998; Draguhn et al. 1998; Hormuzdi et al. 2004; Bennett and Zukin 2004; Lebeau et al. 2003; Friedman and Strowbridge 2003; Buhl et al. 2003; Rozental et al. 2000; Perez-Velazquez and Carlen 2000; Galaretta and Hestrin 1999; Gibson et al. 1999). Serotonin, Membrane Viscosity and Post-synaptic Interactome The aspect of neuron and platelet cell membrane viscosity (Tonello and Cocchi 2010) is often missed, as responsible of the central goverment of that bio molecular intracellular complex, called interactoma, and that is defined “as the whole array of molecular interactions that take place in an organism and allow the cascade of regulatory molecules including the mechanism of action of enzymes and metabolic reactions”. These findings agree with Heron (Heron et al. 1980) who described the correlation between serotoninergic cell membrane viscosity, due to the fatty acids pattern, and serotonin receptor binding capacity, capable of constraining the serotonin availability and Lee (1985) who reviews and discuss the role of lipids and cholesterol on neuron membrane viscosity and serotonin receptors. The researches, anyway, didn‟t explain the link brain-platelet-serotonin. After 30 years it has been possible to demonstrate, with a mathematical model for the classification of the depressive disorder, that platelet membrane viscosity rhythms the depressive disorder and finds in Arachidonic Acid the main element of criticality when it is too high in platelets. The high concentration of Arachidonic Acid in platelets is a step limit to its mutual exchange with the brain and, as a result, the Arachidonic acid increases its neuronal concentration, since brain receives Arachidonic Acid also from other sources (Cocchi et al. 2009a, b) Three essential points constitute the issue about the relationship between the cytoskeleton molecular structure and the psychiatric disorder: 1. Serotonin levels 2. Platelet and neuron membrane viscosity 3. The Interactome-Consciousness relationship ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 556 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Concerning the first two points, the hypothesis of the link between platelet-brain and serotonin is that in subjects with Major Depression (MD) the high platelet membrane concentration of arachidonic acid (highly unsaturated fatty acid) and then, the decreased viscosity, reduces the serotonin platelet receptors uptake, thus favoring a decrease of the serotonin concentration within platelets (Heron et al 1980; Cocchi et al. 2008). This would explain the similarity (low serotonin concentration) between neurons and platelets in depressive disorder (Takahashi 1976; Edwards et al. 1978; Marangos et al. 1980; Kim et al. 1982; Rotman 1983; Dreux and Launay 1985; WirzJustice 1988; Camacho and Dimsdale 2000; Plein and Berk 2001; Maurer-Spurej et al. 2007). Increased brain and plasma phospholipids arachidonic acid concentrations have been found, respectively, in depressed rats (Green et al 2005) and humans (Tiemeier et al. 2003). About the third point, protein Gsα increases in neuronal membrane (Lipid Raft Microdomain), according to the degree of viscosity, in suicides (depressive disorder) when compared to death due to other causes as demonstrated by Rasenick group (Donati et al. 2008). As a part of the postsynaptic interactome connection Popova et al. (2002) report about the interaction of tubulin with protein Gsα, influencing the dynamics of microtubules in the cytoskeleton. These interactions determine a close link with the Hameroff–Penrose Orch OR theory and it is possible to hypnotesize that, through this mechanism, is possible to modify the consciousness state (Hameroff and Penrose 1996, Hameroff 2010). According to the experimental findings a very suggestive molecular depression hypothesis was built and the link, embracing normal and altered membrane viscosity, platelet-brain fatty acid transfer, serotonin levels and the levels of consciousness has been described (Cocchi et al. 2010a,b). The Membrane Receptors – Interactome Relationships Tubulin, with its microtubules, is the complex of functional material most represented among all cytoskeleton elements, and, this aspect, according to the logic of biology, can not be underestimated if compared to the mass-function relationship. The correlation-tubulin synapses, being tubulin needed for growth and maintenance of synapses and neurites, makes a first observation plausible, i.e., that synapses are based on the mass of tubulin and microtubules (Cronly-Dillon and Perry 1979) and that it affects the brain mass, particularly, the cortex (Bond and Woods 2006). It is, however, to be taken into account that a complete conceptual framework enabling to describe the behaviour of the principal actors playing the consciousness game – tubulin, serotonin, neurons, cytoskeleton, cell membranes, synapses – appears to be still lacking. The picture is complicated by the complex pattern of (chemical) interactions involving these actors. Here, by adopting a strongly reductive approach aiming to capture only the essential aspects of these interactions, we will try to sketch a possible logical scheme of their effects. This scheme could be used as a basis for more detailed mathematical models which, in part, have been already built. In any case, within the context of the present paper we will avoid any reference to their technical aspects. Let us, now, start from the first actor of the consciousness game: the tubulin. On the properties and the structure of this protein there is a wide literature, both of experimental and theoretical kind (Tuszynski and Kurzynski 2003; McKean 2001; Tuszyinski et al. 2005; Low et al. 2001; Craddock and Tuszynski 2010). It leads to a picture of tubulin as a molecular system, consisting of a heterodimer, in which valence electrons are forced to lie within double-well electrostatic potentials ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 557 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. without the possibility of jumping to the conduction band. A quantum-mechanical description of the behaviour of an electron within this system shows, once adopted suitable approximations, that there are two available energy states: a ground state and an excited state. Such a result is obtained by assuming that the electron is not localized, being in superposition between the two wells. Then, if we focus our attention on the tubulin electron, the tubulin dimer itself can be viewed as equivalent to a qubit. It is to be remarked that, from a quantum-mechanical point of view, the superposition between the two wells would not be eliminated by assuming the electron localized within a specific well, owing to the possibility of quantum tunnelling between one well and the other. But, the knowledge of tubulin properties is not enough. Namely tubulin is only a component of polymerized aggregates of tubulin molecules, the so-called microtubules, which constitute one of the fundamental components of cell cytoskeleton. The latter, as it is well known, can be considered as the main cell component responsible for cell organization and operation (Kandel et al. 2000). Microtubules have a cylindrical form, which seems to suggest that each one of them could act as a sort of channel for vehiculating the quantum information stored in the tubulins. Unfortunately the things are not so simple. First of all, each tubulin dimer is characterized by an electric dipole moment. This implies that, by adopting suitable assumptions, each microtubule can be described as an Ising-like network of spins (Slyadnikov 2007). The latter could correspond to the single qubits of the different tubulin dimers, so that models based on network qubits (Trugenberger 2001; Trugenberger 2002; Pessa 2010) could be suited to describe the behaviour of a single microtubule. The problem with these models is that, in general, they allow three different kinds of phases (i.e. ferromagnetic, antiferromagnetic, and glassy), whose occurrence depend on the features of the distribution of tubulin dimers coupling factors. The three phases correspond to very different dynamical behaviours of the whole microtubule. In turn, the conditions granting for the occurrence of these phases depend on the concentrations of chemical substances present within the cell during the polymerization originating the microtubule itself. The latter circumstance forces us to focus our attention on the interactions between the microtubules and the environment as well as on the interactions between the microtubules themselves. Even if this topic is still poorly known, we can roughly assert that a network of microtubules looks very different from a traditional neural network (Karp 2008; Wade 2009). First of all, there is no direct communication between different microtubules, contrarily to neurons which are connected by synapses. There exist microtubule-associated proteins (MAP) whose major role, however, seems to be the one of granting the mechanical stability of the microtubule system. In fact, there is no evidence that they support some form of information transmission. The input and output of each microtubule, therefore, consists of a direct communication with the intracellular environment. This not precludes, of course, some form of communication between a microtubule and another which, in any case, is mediated by this environment. As regards the input and output of each microtubule, the most known one seems to be related to proteins which are transported along the microtubule owing to the action of kinesin and dynein motor proteins. A number of researchers, however, hold that microtubules emit also electric pulses (the main proponents of this thesis are Hameroff and Tuszynski, together with their coworkers; their papers have been already quoted elsewhere in this paper; here we will limit to add (Hameroff 2002; Priel et al. 2006; Tuszynski 2006; Priel 2010; Faber 2006). The characteristics of these latter depend, in a crucial way, on the interactions between the qubits associated to the single tubulin dimers. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 558 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. It would thus be possible to assert that within microtubules occurs some form of quantum computation, whose output, however, is strongly dependent on the details of physical conditions holding within each microtubule. This dependence leads us to take into consideration the main difference between the microtubule system and neural networks: microtubules are not stable objects. Namely they can assemble (undergoing polymerization) and disassemble (depolymerization), grow and shorten. All these processes (and whence the whole cytoskeleton structure) are controlled by the concentrations of chemical substances present in the intracellular environment. The microtubule dynamics is therefore very complicated and, so far, there have been very few attempts to model it (Shpil‟man and Nadezhdina 2006). In any case, within such a dynamics a major role is played by cell membrane. Not only there is a direct connection between microtubules and membrane, but the properties and the dynamics of the latter are just the controlling factors which act on the concentrations of the chemical substances influencing the dynamics of microtubules and cytoskeleton. The reciprocal interactions membrane-cytoskeleton (Luna and Hitt 1992; Kusumi and Sako 1996; Helmreich 2003) thus let us individuate a very complex system which could be, on one side, self-regulating, and, on the other side, could constrain the macroscopic activities of multi-cellular organs, like, for instance, the ones constituting the human or animal bodies. As regards membrane dynamics modelling, there is a consolidated tradition of studies, lasting to the celebrated Hodgkin-Huxley paper (Hodgkin and Huxley 1952) and to the pioneering papers of Delbrück (Saffman and Delbrück 1975). Actually this modelling activity makes use of the most sophisticated tools of mathematics and theoretical physics (Diederichs 2006; Chen and Mikhailov 2010). The results so far obtained evidence how the membrane could be the seat of very complex dynamical phenomena, including spatial pattern formation and travelling waves. The practical application of these findings requires, however, focusing on specific kinds of cells, where theoretical models could be directly related to experimental data. In this regard it seems that the best strategy would be to concentrate our attention on the neuron, the cell which many feel to be at the basis of mental processes and consciousness. While it is still unclear whether the neuron is the only cell responsible for the phenomena associated to consciousness, the high number of experimental researches, devoted to it, makes this cell as the ideal candidate for sketching a general model of the interactions between the different players of the consciousness game. Such a model relies on the latest findings of biochemistry and theoretical physics. Before starting we must warn the reader that the scope of this model is not to account for the detailed phenomenological aspects of consciousness or mental processing. Consciousness and mind are emergent entities which are endowed with an inner coherence and autonomy which cannot be reduced only to some details of neuronal interactions. And, even without resorting to philosophical or physical theories of emergence (Minati and Pessa 2006; Corradini and O‟Connor 2010), we could accept the idea that the human mind processes can influence or control the neural activity. The problem is another: if the autonomous operation of consciousness and mind requires, in usual conditions, the occurrence of a delicate equilibrium among the different actors of the consciousness game, what happens when, for some reason, this equilibrium is broken? Of course, we feel that, potentially, the mind could remedy for this breaking, but under what conditions? And how much time would be required? To make a trivial example, if my head has been severely injured, my mental faculties will be partly impaired. In other words, I will be in a pathological state, at least for some time, despite the potentialities of my mind and the fact that it cannot be reduced only to neural activity. In an ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 559 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. analogous way, when the equilibrium between the players of consciousness game is altered, we can assume that this alteration will give rise to a psychopathology, like, for instance, the depression. This does not mean that trying to re-establish the equilibrium through the administering of some drugs will automatically eliminate the psychopathology. Namely, in a so complex game and in presence of the high flexibility of mental processing, it is a naïvety to think that a simple external action can control a system which, instead, undergoes changes only through self-organization processes. But, in any case, we need to know the physical and biochemical conditions underlying the non-pathological conditions, as well as the psychopathological effects deriving from a change of these conditions. And the model we are sketching has just this scope. Serotonin receptors and G proteins Let us, now, start by considering a generic neuron, whose skeleton microtubules, besides influencing many cellular processes, appear to exert a fundamental control action on neurotransmitter signalling, thus regulating the dendritic and synaptic operation (Gardiner et al. 2011). The action of this skeleton is strongly dependent both on the coherence (of quantum nature) of electric pulses emitted (typically under the form of solitons) by the single microtubules, and on the momentary configurational state of the microtubule system. As regards the latter, two opposite possibilities can occur: or this state is more or less stable for some time, or it undergoes very fast changes on time scales comparable to the ones of neuronal refractory time. As many studies have evidenced, the main control on the cytoskeleton configuration is due to the action of the neurotransmitter serotonin (Azmitia 2001). The seven recognized families of serotonin receptors are termed 5-HT1 through 5-HT7. With the exception of the 5-HT3 receptor, a ligand-gated ion channel, all other serotonin receptors are G protein-coupled receptors that activate an intracellular second messenger cascade to produce an excitatory or inhibitory response. Receptors 5-HT1A to 5-HT1F and 5-HT5A-B are coupled to the protein Giα, which inhibits the cAMP-dependent pathway by suppressing production of cAMP from ATP. Receptors 5-HT2A to 5-HT2C are coupled to protein Gq/11α, stimulating membrane bound phospholipase C, which then cleaves PIP2 (a minor membrane phosphoinositol) into two second messengers, IP3 and diacylglycerol. Receptors 5-HT4,6,7 are coupled to protein Gsα, which enhances the production of cAMP from ATP via direct stimulation of the membrane-associated enzyme adenylate cyclase; cAMP acts as a second messenger that goes on to interact with and activate protein kinase A, which can then phosphorylate myriad of downstream targets (Raymond et al. 2006). It suffices, here, to remember that the serotonin action is mediated by second messengers produced by G proteins; the most notable are the Giα and the Gsα. While the action of Giα favours the depolymerization of microtubules and the steady state of neuroelectric activity, the Gsα favours polymerization and instability of neuroelectric activity. The relative proportion of these two proteins in neurons is poorly known and, in any case, is not constant from a neuron to another. What are now the possible macroscopic behaviours of a neuron whose membrane contains Giα and Gsα activated by serotonin coming from the extracellular space? It is possible to argue that, if the single microtubules are responsible for the generation of electric-dipole quantum-coherent solitonic states in absence of very fast decoherence phenomena (as regards the conditions granting for this circumstance see Mavromatos 2010), then the whole microtubule cytoskeleton can be assimilated to ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 560 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. a probabilistic Boolean network able to act as a sort of quantum computer (Mavromatos et al. 2002). This implies that, from a macroscopic point of view, a single neuron can be modelled as an inputoutput system endowed with an inner (quantum) computational subsystem. It is then evident that, if Giα predominate over Gsα, in presence of serotonin this computational system has a poorer structure which, on the other hand, can be considered as fixed on neural computational time scale. The simplest picture of such a kind of system is the one of a McCulloch-Pitts neuron or, in more general terms, of a spiking neuron with fixed parameters. On the contrary, if Gsα predominate, our neuron will behave like a system whose structure changes with time, that is, in a first approximation in which the only macroscopic parameter is given by its threshold, as a neuron whose threshold is variable with time as a function of the previous activation states. This kind of neurons attracted the attention of researchers since the end of the Eighties after the proof that they were behaving as chaotic deterministic systems (Horn and Usher 1989; Horn and Opher 2000; Sussillo and Abbott 2009). We can thus come to a first conclusion, consisting in the fact that the two kinds of serotonin receptors are associated to two different kinds of neuronal behaviour, normal and stable, and chaotic and unstable. Why is this conclusion, useful? In essence, because of the existence of a famous conjecture, which states that the most effective way of living is characterized by structures and behaviors that seem to be on the border between order and chaos.The reason for such a conjecture, first formulated by Langton (Langton 1990), can be easily understood: the vicinity to order grants, on one side, for the stability and efficiency in solving routine problems within a stable environment, while the vicinity to chaos allows, on the other side, the growth of new ideas and strategies (owing to the high sensitivity to small disturbances, typical of chaotic systems) in presence of fast changes in the environmental conditions (Kauffman 1993). It is not so easy to test the validity of this conjecture (Mitchell et al. 1993). In any case there is a lot of experimental evidence that human brain could just be a system living at the edge of chaos (Kitzbichler et al. 2009). The fact that one of the two serotonin receptors allows for normal, ordered, neural behaviour, while the other allows for chaotic neural behaviour, evidences that the presence of both is just what is required for having a neural system operating at the edge of chaos. It is useful, in this regard, to underline that all psychopathologies are, in a way or in another, associated to some form of leaving the edge of chaos towards a more ordered (and psychotic) state. We can even conjecture that there is an interaction between two classes of G proteins associated to serotonin receptors, due, for instance to a dynamical relationship between their concentrations on the membrane. If we denote by x and y the concentrations, respectively, of Giα and the Gsα, a possible dynamical system describing their chemical kinetics could have the simple form: dx dy  a x  b x y  x0 ,  c y  b x y  y0 dt dt This system is very similar to the Lotka-Volterra system describing predator-prey interaction. As it is well known from standard textbooks (Davis 1962; Glendinning 1994) for suitable choices of the values of parameters a, b, c, x0, y0 the system allows an oscillatory solution, whose amplitude and centre of oscillation depend on parameter values. The parameters x0 and y0 have been introduced to avoid the vanishing of the equilibrium value of one concentration when the other is exactly zero (as it appears to be the case in some kinds of neurons). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 561 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. If the system parameters are kept constant, they can describe the oscillation between order and chaos which should grant for the occurrence of a normal psychological answer to the environmental demands. What happens, however, if they change their value? An easy mathematical analysis shows that the amplitude of the oscillation, or its centre, could change in such a way as to shift the values of concentrations out of the physically allowable region, so that only one of the two receptors can survive. In this case a psychopathological behaviour of the neural system, at all levels, is to be expected, either because we have a too ordered and rigid configuration of mental processes, or because we have an unpredictable dynamics, too sensitive to any perturbation. It is to be remarked that the former case is the less likely to occur, owing to the fact that the noise always present in the neural system can effectively counteract the chaos so as to produce ordered behaviours. This is evidenced, for instance, by experimental observations about the behaviour of the olfactory bulb. The most important contribution is the one due to the studies of Freeman (Freeman 1992; Freeman 1994; Freeman 1996; Freeman 2000). The influence of noise on ordered behaviours is, instead, lesser and more subtle (Horsthemke and Lefever 1984). In order to understand the cause for the changes of parameter values in the dynamical system described above, we must resort to membrane dynamics, and in particular to changes in membrane viscosity resulting from the interactions with external molecules. Without entering here in a detailed discussion about this subject, partly dealt with elsewhere within this paper, we will limit here to list the variables whose values, according to the model sketched before, could be critical in driving the transition from the normal to the psychopathological state, in particular the depressive one. Among these variables the most important ones appear to be the quantities of serotonin and tubulin available. Low levels of both preclude, on one hand, the operation of microtubules and whence of the cytoskeleton, and, on the other hand, the existence of a correct interplay between chaotic and ordered neural dynamics which keeps the mind processing at the edge of chaos [as regards the crucial role of these variable in depression (Crespi 2010)]. But we cannot forget the crucial role of Giα and the Gsα concentrations, as well as the one of cell membrane viscosity. The latter, in turn, calls into play the concentrations of fatty acids. It is known that they have an important role in neuronal membranes, influencing the physico-chemical properties of the latter (Yehuda et al. 1998). According to our previous considerations, therefore, they should play a role in depression. And this is just what clinical research evidenced: some fatty acids (n-3) can help to reduce symptoms of major depressive disorder (Logan 2004), while Arachidonic Acid is involved in major depressive disorder. The Arachdonic Acid induces a lower viscosity than the omega 3 fatty acids, because of the major length of the saturated part of the n-3 fatty acids carbon chain. This gives a major contribution for a higer melting point, if compared to n-6 one and corresponds to a major membrane viscosity, which can increase the serotonin receptors uptake. Of course, all the evidence so far collected does not authorize to think that, by supplying in some way a chemical substance whose concentration could be lower than the critical one, we should induce a remission of depressive symptoms. With reference to the model outlined and above illustrated, the reasoning you have to do is more complex, since the equilibrium between the different components of the game underlying consciousness and mental processing is a delicate affair: to change even a single chemical concentration could induce a chain of disturbances difficult to control. Human and animal consciousness is the result of a self-organization process and we still lack a theory helping us to ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 562 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. influence, in the wanted way, the dynamical and metastable equilibrium states resulting from this process. Further, being in presence of very complex systems, it is to be suspected that such a theory is, in principle, impossible to build owing to intrinsic and logical limitations imposed by the complexity itself. The Interactome-Consciousness Relationship Neuroscience hypothesizes that consciousness is generated by the interoperation of various parts of the brain, called the neural correlates of consciousness, or NCC. The best measurable is γsynchrony EEG, coherent field potential oscillations in the range from 30 to 90 Hz (prototypical 40 Hertz), γ-Synchrony, along with consciousness, apparently moves and evolves through various global distributions and brain regions (Hameroff 2010). If tubulin is involved in the generation of consciousness and its modifications (Hameroff 1994; Tuszynski et al. 1997; Hameroff 2007), if γ-synchrony is the brain wave that represents the best correlate of consciousness and the cell membrane viscosity is conditioning the serotonin receptor availability correspondingly to different psychopathological conditions, in which the γ synchrony frequencies are modified (Flynn et al. 2008) we must ask ourselves about the influence of membrane viscosity on cytoskeleton (Doherty and McMahon 2008), in general, and tubulin, in particular, in relation to the assessment of interactome (Tubulin)-consciousness quantum computational steps and of the interpretation of the phenomenon in its variables. As a consequence we must also raise the question whether a total detachment from consciousness is possible, or if the venue of the physiological changes of consciousness, namely tubulin, is the repository of a memory of consciousness itself such as could be hypothesized also in animals. “Single celled animals such as amoebas and paramecium have no nervous system. However, they are obviously capable of sensing and responding to the presence of food, danger, and obstacles and appear to be capable of learning from their mistakes. The cytoskeleton is thought to be the mechanism through which their awareness is structured. This would imply that not only our neurons but every single cell in our body has its own „nervous system‟ capable of independently processing information” (Minsky 1986). Tubulin, therefore, could become the critical crosslink between the external (perception) and the internal (viscosity of the membrane) environment that is expressed in a modulation of consciousness according to the molecular principles that govern the phenomenon in its determination through a quantum assessment. In all this, we must understand how to consider the quantum computation in relation to the tubulin state. As Woolf (Woolf et al. 2010) has documented, antidepressants and antipsychotic drugs take 2–6 weeks to diminish psychotic symptoms. The lower end of this time interval (2 weeks) is the same time interval over which reorganization of the cytoskeleton in neurons occurs after learning, suggesting that neuropharmacological agents may exert their therapeutic effects via the cytoskeleton and as is argued, e.g., whether is to be considered an initial condition of the tubulin state compared to the quantum computation changes, which will govern the state of consciousness. We should see the whole phenomenon as a "continuum" modulator of a consciousness state which, likely, leaves traces of himself (itself) even in conditions, normally, considered in lack of consciousness. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 563 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Animal Consciousness Embracing Serotonin System and Quantum Nanowire Cytoskeleton Network The existence of serotonergic neurons has been demonstrated in Drosophila (Lundell et al. 1996), in humans (Chugani and Muzik 2000) and in vertebrates. Serotonin (5-HT) plays a role for several bodily functions, such as sleep (Carley and Radulovacki 1999; Portas 2000), food intake, mood (Wurtman and Wurtman 1995) and mammalian body temperature regulation (Cronin and Baker 1977; Myers 1981; AbdelFattah et al. 1997). Diminished serotonin production has a well established association with depressed mood, while increased formation of kynurenines might contribute to development of late-onset depression via their apoptotic, neurotoxic, and oxidative effects and through up-regulation of inducible nitric oxide synthase, phospholipase A2, arachidonic acid, prostaglandin, 5-lipoxygenase, and leukotriene cascade (Oxenkrug 2010). The interesting work of Maurer Spurej (Maurer-Spurej 2005) draws a strong correlation of serotonin to the animal evolution. Maurer-Spurej refers, in the light of experimental evidence, that the presence of serotonin as a circulating factor of thermo-regulation indicates the turning point of evolution between reptile species and warm-blooded animals, which may, in fact, coincide with the rise of “endothermy” (Figure 3). Fig 3. The figure (left) shows the serotonin pathway in its connections with the interactome under normal conditions compared with depressive disorder in which the serotonin transport to platelets and neurons could be modified by the viscosity of the membrane and, therefore, consciousness (Cocchi et al. 2010b). The phylogenetic comparison of animals with and without circulating serotonin, (right), makes it plausible, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 564 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. even for animals, the molecular and quantum hypothesis of consciousness, although for different levels of expression. Assuming that consciousness occurs through the quantum nanowire cytoskeleton network, we should state that a potential consciousness can be expressed by any cell containing a cytoskeleton network, in any animal species, and this could represent the biological interface supporting the Manousakis (2006) view of consciousness. Therefore, different potential expression of consciousness levels might occur according to the evidence mentioned above. This statement must, however, take into account certain considerations. The Orch OR theory provides at least the presence of 300 neurons as the minimum level to express conscioussness states which corresponds to 100 milliseconds of quantum coherence, then it seems very unlikely that in paramecium is possible to speak of " true consciousness", in addition, the paramecium certainly does not have a mature but a primitive form of cytoskeleton (tubulin-based circuits) (Hameroff 1998a). A sort of "pre-conscious protein-based quantum computation" could represent a state of evolutionary continuity among living organisms. The scientific debate on the Orch OR Theory has never mentioned the role of serotonin in living species, possessing or not serotonin. Human and animal consciousness, therefore, should be considered and discussed with respect to the pre-and post-serotonin era (Figure 4). Serotonin should be considered as a modulator of the intensity of mood disorders and of the different types of psychotic disorder (Jackman et al. 1983; Mann et al. 1992; Kovacic et al. 2008; Fujii and Nagamine 20001; Blardi et al. 2002) and therefore, could be the subtle regulator of the neuro correlate of consciousness through the receptor-interactome-cytoskeleton network connections. Figure 4 compares the assumptions of the border between quantum consciousness and classic consciousness. In animal models, according to the anatomical and physiological characteristics of organisms and for the presence of circulating serotonin, you can think that only at the transition from cold-blooded and warm-blooded animals (Maurer Spurej 2005) consciousness begins to take on characteristics of increasing complexity. From Drosophila to Humans has been well documented the presence of serotonergic neurons (Lundell et al. 1996; Chugani and Muzik 2000; Moore et al. 2003) of early phylogenetic origin (Jacobs and Azmitia 1992; Azmitia 2001). The first evidence for the presence of serotonin is in thrombocytes of birds and of three reptilian species, the endothermic leatherback sea turtle, the green sea turtle and the partially endothermic American alligator (Maurer Spurej 2005). Available evidence suggests that, in vertebrates, 5-HTcontaining enterochromaffin cells are lacking only where there is an innervation of the gut mucosa by nerve fibres containing high concentrations of 5-HT (Anderson and Campbell, 1988). At this point a reflection arises, is it, really, the late appearance of circulating serotonin the watershade between quantum consciousness and classic consciousness? This could confirm the hypothesis of the existence of a watershed in the evolution of consciousness, in essence, giving properties of continuity to the molecular mechanisms of consciousness with the Orch OR Theory, from the most primitive conditions to the most evolutive conditions. A submerged animal consciousness that sees, probably, within tubulin and microtubules, the selfdetermination of a consciousness state, limited to what is necessary to exist without emotional expressions and that faces a growing neuro-related consciousness event (classic information) with expressions of emotional consciousness, more complex and differentiated, to the progress of a critical mass ratio among tubulin, synapses, cortex and serotonin. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 565 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. In practice, this would generate the circumstances that give shape to the molecular phenomenon of "consciousness", to those aspects that interface the human being with its environment and its perception, in a complexity that, from the human being goes back to the animals that have marked the endothermic turning point, to the most primitive forms of the cytoskeleton. Fig 4. Figure shows the border between classic and quantum consciousness according, also, to the appearance of serotonin. Conclusion Consciousness occurs, according to the most recent acquisitions, among linear and not linear mathematics and quantum computation, open to the interpretation of psychopathological phenomena. It would be interesting, then, as further of ways of research, understanding the biological dynamics of microtubules with the "catastrophe theory", while the difficulty to explain highly complex phenomena (with more than five variables) remains. In nature, as in biological systems, chaos, seems a more common order and from chaos a multitude of forms are created: abrupt changes among structurally stable states, conflicts that produce new stability, always subject to new changes in state. René Thom (1983, 1989, cf. Even the critical position of Zaheler and Sussmann, 1978) presents the "catastrophe theory" as an attempt to explain the natural forms, of their state of maintenance, of their genesis and of the conflicts which are in their origin. The universe is more a cosmos than a chaos, and catastrophe theory tries to explain its forms, regardless of the substrate: any form owes its origin to a conflict. Already Heraclitus of Ephesus said: "War is the mother of all things and queen of all things” (DK 22 B 53), and again, in fragment 8: "Where there is opposition there is reconciliation and the most beautiful harmony rises from differences and everything is generated by contrasts." ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 566 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. In our case, we could see the tubulin as a "form", "site of catastrophe," which corrects the conflict between consciousness and trauma (that is, simultaneously, also the origin), as well as the edge between two surfaces, a desk placed on a horizontal plane and the vertical wall, is "a place of catastrophe." Indeed, the edge originates from the conflict between the piece of wood and the metal saw which has drew a boundary line in the wood board. Ultimately, from the comparison among philosophy, molecular biology, higher mathematics, can originate a new approach to the traumas of the consciousness and to the problem of memory and identity. In a few words it seems to be consistent the hypothesis that Schrödinger proteins interactoma and in particular the cytoskeleton nanowire network is the best biological interface for potential expression of consciousness, being typical and specific for each animal species and that consciousness is always a potential. It‟s very fascinating to think that every animal possess a primary Schrödinger proteins complex (cytoskeleton) and even in the absence of circulating serotonin there is a potential of consciousness that is essential to the behavior of some life forms, while other species such as invertebrates, procariotes and even archea possess expertise in their own domain probably mediated by their own Schrödinger proteins interactoma. References AbdelFattah AFM, Matsumoto K, Murakami Y, Gammaz HAK, Mohamed MF, Watanabe H (1997) Central serotonin level-dependent changes in body temperature following administration of tryptophan to pargyline- and harmaline pretreated rats. Gen Pharmacol 28: 405–409. Anderson C and Campbell G (1988) Immunohistochemical study of 5-HT-containing neurons in the teleost intestine: relationship to the presence of enterochromaffin cells. Cell and Tissue Research. Volume 254, Number 3, 553-559. Anderson PW and Stein DL (1985) Broken symmetry, emergent properties, dissipative structures, life. Are they related? in F.E. Yates (Ed.). Self organizing Systems: The emergence of Order (pp. 445-457). New York: Plenum Press. Azmitia EC (2001) Modern views on an ancient chemical: Serotonin effects on cell proliferation, maturation, and apoptosis. Brain Research Bulletin 56: 413-424. Bekoff and Peirce (2009) Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animals, Chicago University of Chicago Press, 2009, it. tr., Giustizia Selvaggia. La vita morale degli animali, Milano, Baldini &Castoldi, 2010. Bekoff M, Allen C (1997) Cognitive Ethology: Slayers, Skeptics, and Proponents, in R. W. Mitchell, N. Thompson e L. Miles (by), Anthropomorphism, Anecdote, and Animals: The Emperor‟s New Clothes?, Albany NY, SUNY Press. Bekoff M, Allen C, Burghardt GM. (by) (2002) The Cognitive Animal: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives on Animal Cognition, Cambridge MA, MIT Press. Bianchi M, Moser C, Lazzarini C, Vecchiato E, Crespi F (2002) Forced swimming test and fluoxetine treatment: in vivo evidence that peripheral 5-HT in rat platelet-rich plasma mirrors cerebral extracellular 5-HT levels, whilst 5-HT in isolated platelets mirrors neuronal 5-HT changes. Exp Brain Res 2002 143:191-7. Binswanger L (1946) Uber die daseinsanalytische Forschungsrichtung in der Psichiatrie, Pfullingen: Neske. Blardi P, De Lalla A, Leo A, Auteri, A, Iapichino S, Di Muro A, Dell'Erba A, Castrogiovanni P (2002) Serotonin and Fluoxetine Levels in Plasma and Platelets After Fluoxetine Treatment in Depressive Patients. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology 22: 131-136. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 567 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Bond J and Woods CG (2006) Cytoskeletal genes regulating brain size, Current Opinion in Cell Biology 2006, 18: 95– 101. Buhl DL, Harris KD Hormuzdi SG, Monyer H, Buzsaki G (2003) Selective impairment of hippocampal gamma oscillations in connexin-36 knock-out mouse in vivo. Journal of Neuroscience 23(3):1013-8. Camacho A, Dimsdale JE (2000) Platelets and Psychiatry: Lessons Learned from Old and New tudies. Psychosom. Med. 62: 326- 336, Carley DW, Radulovacki M (1999) Role of peripheral serotonin in the regulation of central sleep apneas in rats. Chest 115: 1397–1401. Chen HY, Mikhailov AS (2010) Dynamics of biomembranes with active multiple-state inclusions. Physical Review E 81: 031901, 1-11. Chugani DC, Muzik O (2000) Alpha[C-11] methyl-Ltryptophan PET maps brain serotonin synthesis and kynurenine pathway metabolism. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab 20: 2–9. Cocchi M, Tonello L, Tsaluchidu S, Puri BK (2008). The use of artificial neural networks to study fatty acids in neuropsychiatric disorders. BMC Psychiatry 8 (Suppl 1): S3. Cocchi M. Tonello L. De Lucia A. Amato P. (2009a). “Platelet and Brain Fatty Acids: a model for the classifcation of the animals? Part 1”. International Journal of Anthropology, 24, 69-76. Cocchi M. Tonello L. De Lucia A. Amato P. (2009b). Platelet and Brain Fatty Acids: a model for the classification of the animals? Part 2. Platelet and Brain Fatty acid transfer: Hypothesis on Arachidonic Acid and its relationship to Major Depression, International Journal of Anthropology, 24, 69-76. Cocchi M. Tonello L. Gabrielli F. (2009c). Quantum consciousness and a-quantum consciousness. New Medicine XIII, 4, 114-115. Cocchi M, Sardi L, Tonello L, Martelli G (2009d) Do mood disorders play a role on pig welfare? Ital J Anim Sci 8: 691-704. Cocchi M, Tonello L (2010) Bio molecular considerations in Major Depression and Ischemic Cardiovascular Disease. Central Nervous System Agents in Medicinal Chemistry10: 97-107. Cocchi M, Tonello L, Rasenick MM (2010a) Human depression: a new approach in quantitative psychiatry. Annals of General Psychiatry. 9:25. Cocchi M, Gabrielli F, Tonello L, Pregnolato M (2010b) The Interactome Hypothesis of Depression. NeuroQuantology 4: 603-613. Cocchi M, Gabrielli F, Tonello L, Pregnolato M (2011) Consciousness and Hallucinations: Molecular Considerations and Theoretical Questions. NeuroQuantology, 9: 182-189. Corradini A, O‟Connor T (Eds.) (2010). Emergence in Science and Philosophy. New York: Routledge. Craddock TJA, Tuszynski JA (2010) A critical assessment of the information processing capabilities of neuronal microtubules using coherent excitations. Journal of Biological Physics 36: 53-70. Craddock TJA, Beauchemin C, Tuszynski JA (2009) Information processing mechanisms in microtubules at physiological temperature: Model predictions for experimental tests. Biosystems 97: 28-34. Crespi F (2010) Further electrochemical and Behavioural Evidence of a direct relationship between central 5-HT and Cytoskeleton in the control of mood. The Open Neurology Journal 4: 5-14. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 568 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Cronin MJ, Baker MA (1977) Midbrain heating in freely behaving cats (Felis domestica) – further evidence on role of serotonin in thermoregulation. Gen. Pharmacol 8: 359–363. Cronly-Dillon J and Perry GW (1979) Effect of visual experience on tubulin synthesis during a critical period of visual cortex development in the hooded rat. Physiol. 293: 469–484. Damasio A. (1999). The Feeling of What happens. Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness, San Diego CA, Harcourt Inc. Davis HT (1962) Introduction to nonlinear differential and integral equations. New York: Dover. De Monticelli R (1995) L‟ascesi filosofica, Feltrinelli, Milano. De Monticelli R (1998) La conoscenza personale, Guerini e Associati, Milano. Dennett D. (1996). Kinds of Minds, New York, Basic Books, it.tr. La mente e le menti, Milano, Rizzoli 2000. Diederichs F (2006) Mathematical simulation of membrane processes and metabolic fluxes of the pancreatic β-cell. Bulletin of Mathematical Biology 68: 1779-1818. Dermietzel R (1998) Gap junction wiring: a 'new' principle in cell-to-cell communication in the nervous system? Brain Research Reviews 26:176-83. Doherty GJ and McMahon HT (2008). "Mediation, Modulation and Consequences of Membrane-Cytoskeleton Interactions". Annual Review of Biophysics 37: 65–95. Donati RJ, Dwivedi Y, Roberts RC, Conley RR, Pandey GN, Rasenick MM: Postmortem brain tissue of depressed suicides reveals increased Gs localization in lipid raft domains where it is less likely to activate adenylyl cyclase. J Neurosci 2008, 28:3042-3050. Draguhn A, Traub RD, Schmitz D, Jefferys JG (1998) Electrical coupling underlies high-frequency oscillations in the hippocampus in vitro. Nature. 394(6689):189-92. Dreux, C., Launay, J.M. Blood platelets. Neuronal Model in Psychiatric disorders. Encephale 11: 57-64, 1985.; WirzJustice, A. (1988) Platelet research in psychiatry. Experientia 44, 145152.; Edwards D.J., Spiker D.G., Kupfer D.J., Foster G., Neil J.F., Abrams L. (1978). Platelet monoamine oxidase in affective disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 35(12):1443-6.; Faber J, Portugal R, Rosa LP (2006) Information processing in brain microtubules. BioSystems 83: 1-9. Flynn G, Alexander D, Harris A, Whitford T, Wong W, Galletly C, Silverstein S, Gordon E, Williams LM (2008) Increased absolute magnitude of gamma synchrony in first-episode psychosis. Schizophr Res 105:262-271. Freeman WJ (1992) Tutorial in neurobiology: From single neurons to brain chaos. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos 2: 451-482. Freeman WJ (1994) Characterization of state transitions in spatially distributed, chaotic, nonlinear dynamical systems in cerebral cortex. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science 29: 291-303 Freeman WJ (1996) Random activity at the microscopic neural level in cortex (“noise”) sustains and is regulated by low-dimensional dynamics of macroscopic cortical activity (“chaos”). International Journal of Neural Systems 7: 473480. Freeman WJ (2000) Neurodynamics: An exploration in mesoscopic brain dynamics. London: Springer. Fujii YKA, Nagamine I, (2001) Platelet serotonin concentrations in medicated schizophrenic patients. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol and Biol Psychiatry 25: 983-992. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 569 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Galimberti U (1999) Psiche e techne. L‟uomo nel‟età della tecnica, Feltrinelli, Milano Gardiner J, Overall R, Marc J (2011) The microtubule cytoskeleton acts as a key downstream effector of neurotransmitter signalling. Synapse 65: 249-256. Gibson JR, Beierlein M, Connors BW (1999) Two networks of electrically coupled inhibitory neurons in neocortex. Nature 402:75-79. Glendinning P (1994) Stability, instability and chaos: An introduction to the theory of nonlinear differential equations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Gozzano S. (a cura di) (2001a). Mente senza linguaggio. Il pensiero e gli animali, Roma, Editori Riunti. Green P, Gispan-Herman I, Yadid G (2005) Increased arachidonic acid concentration in the brain of Flinders Sensitive Line rats, an animal model of epression. J. Lipid Res. 46:1093-1096. Griffin DR (1992) Animal Minds, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, it. tr. Menti animali, Torino, Bollati Boringhieri, 1999. Hameroff SR (1994) Quantum Coherence in Microtubules: A Neural Basis For Emergent Consciousness? Journal of Consciousness Studies 1: 91.118. Hameroff SR, Penrose R (1996) Orchestrated reduction of quantum coherence in brain microtubules: a model for consciousness. In Toward a Science of Consciousness - The First Tucson Discussions and Debates Edited by: Hameroff SR, Kaszniak A, Scott AC. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press. pp 507-540. Hameroff S (1998) Consciousness, the brain and spacetime geometry, in The Annals of the New York Accademy of Sciences, Special Issue Cajal and Consciousness. Hameroff S (1998a) Funda-Mentality: Is the conscious mind subtly linked to a basic level of the universe? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2: 119-127. Hameroff S, Nip A, Porter M, Tuszynski J (2002) Conduction pathways in microtubules, biological quantum computation, and consciousness. BioSystems 64: 149-168. Hameroff S and Penrose R (2003) Conscious events as orchestrated space-time selections, Neuroquantology, 1:10-35. Hameroff S (2006). Consciousness, Neurobiology and Quantum Mechanics: The Case for a Connection. In J. Tuszynski (ed.), The Emerging Physics of Consciousness. Springer-Verlag. Hameroff S (2007) Orchestrated reduction of quantum coherence in brain microtubules, Neuroquantology, 5: 1-8. Hameroff SR (2010) The "conscious pilot"-dendritic synchrony moves through the brain to mediate consciousness. J Biol Phys; 36:71-93. Heidegger M (1977) Sein und Zeit, Klostermann, Frankfurt a. M. 1977 Helmreich EJM (2003) Environmental influences on signal transduction through membranes: a retrospective minireview. Biophysical Chemistry 100: 519-534. Henrich J, Ensminger J, McElreath R, Barr A, Barrett C, Bolyanatz A, Cardenas JC, Gurven M, Gwako E, Henrich N, Lesorogol C, Marlowe F, Tracer D, Ziker J (2010). Markets, Religion, Community Size, and the Evolution of fairness and Punishment. Science, 327: 1480-1484. Herbert N (1987) Quantum Reality: Beyond the New Physics, American Journal of Physics, 55: 478-479. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 570 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Heron DS, Shinitzky M, Hershkowitz M, Samuel D (1980) Lipid fluidity markedly modulates the binding of serotonin to mouse brain membranes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 77: 7463-7467. Hodgkin AL, Huxley AF (1952) A quantitative description of membrane current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. Journal of Physiology 117: 500-544. Horn D, Opher I (2000) Complex dynamics of neuronal thresholds. Neurocomputing 32: 161-166. Horn D, Usher M (1989) Neural networks with dynamical thresholds. Physical Review A 40: 1036-1044. Hormuzdi SG, Filippov MA, Mitropoulou G, Monyer H, Bruzzone R (2004) Electrical synapses: a dynamic signaling system that shapes the activity of neuronal networks. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1662:113-3. Horsthemke W, Lefever R (1984) Noise-induced transitions. Berlin: Springer. Husserl E (1950) Ideen zu einer reiner Phänomenologie Philosophie, I, M. Nijhoff, Den Haag. Husserl E 1954) Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie. Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie, M. Nijhoff, Den Haag 1954: see paragraph 9, KR 53-88)] Jackman H, Luchins D, Meltzer HY (1983) Platelet serotonin levels in schizophrenia: Relationship to race and psychopathology.. Biol Psychiatry 18: 887-902. Jacobs BL, Azmitia EC (1992) Structure and function of the brain serotonin system. Physiol Rev 72:165-229. John ER, Tang Y, Brill AB, Young R, Ono K (1986) Double layered metabolic maps of memory. Science 233:1167-75. Kandel ER, Schwartz J.H, Jessell TM (2000) Principles of Neural Science, 4th edition. New York: McGraw-Hill. Karp G (2008) Cell and Molecular Biology: Concepts and Experiments, 5th edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Kauffman S (1993) Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. New York: Oxford University Press. Kim, H.L., Plaisant, O., Leboyer, M., Gay, C. (1982) Reduction of platelet serotonin in major depression (endogenous depression). C R Acad Sci. III, 295: 619-622. Kitzbichler MG, Smith ML, Christensen SR, Bullmore E (2009) Broadband criticality of human brain network synchronization. PLoS Computational Biology 5(3): e1000314. Kovacic Z, Henigsberg N, Pivac N, Nedic G, Borovecki (2008) A Platelet serotonin concentration and suicidal behavior in combat related posttraumatic stress disorder. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry 15: 544-51. Kusumi A, Sako Y (1996) Cell surface organization by the membrane skeleton. Current Opinion in Cell Biology 8: 566-574. Langton CG (1990) Computation at the edge of Chaos: Phase transitions and emergent computation. Physica D 42: 1237. LeBeau FE, Traub RD, Monyer H, Whittington MA, Buhl EH (2003) The role of electrical signaling via gap junctions in the generation of fast network oscillations. Brain Research Bulletin 62: 3-13. Lee RE (1985) Membrane engineering to rejuvenate the ageing brain. Can Med Assoc J 132: 325–327. Lesurtel M, Soll C, Graf R, Clavien PA (2008) Role of serotonin in the hepato-gastrointestinal tract: an old molecule for new perspectives. Cell Mol Life Sci 65: 940-52. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 571 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Libet B, Wright EW Jr, Feinstein B, Pearl DK (1979) Subjective referral of the timing for a conscious sensory experience. Brain 102:193-224. Logan AC (2004) Omega-3 fatty acids and major depression: A primer for the mental health professional. Lipids in Health and Disease 3: 25-32. Lowe J, Li H, Downing KH, Nogales E (2001) Refined structure of β-tubulin at 3.5 Ǻ resolution. Journal of Molecular Biology 313: 1045-1057. Luna EJ, Hitt AL (1992) Cytoskeleton-Plasma membrane interactions. Science 258: 955-964. Lundell MJ, ChuLaGraff Q, Doe CQ, Hirsh J (1996) The engrailed and huckebein genes are essential for development of serotonin neurons in the Drosophila CNS. Mol. Cell. Neurosci 7: 46–61. Mann JJ, McBride PA, Anderson GM, Mieczkowski TA (1992) Platelet and whole blood serotonin content in depressed inpatients: Correlations with acute and life-time psychopathology Biol Psychiatry 32: 243-257. Manousakis E (2006) Founding Quantum Theory on the Basis of Consciousness. Foundations of Physics. 36: 795-838. Marangos, P.J. Iain C. Campbell, Donald E. Schmechel, Dennis L. Murphy, Frederick K. Goodwin. Blood Platelets Contain a Neuron-Specific Enolase Subunit, Journul of Neurochemistry 34: 1254- 1258, 1980.; Mascalzoni E, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2010). Innate sensitivity for self-propelled causal agency in newly hatched chicks. PNAS, 107 (9), 4483-4485. Maurer-Spurej E (2005) Circulating serotonin in vertebrates. CMLS, Cell Mol Life Sci 62: 1881–1889. Maurer-Spurej E, Pittendreigh C, Misri S (2007) Platelet serotonin levels support depression scores for women with postpartum depression. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 32: 23-29 Mavromatos NE (2010) Quantum mechanical aspects of cell microtubules: Science fiction or realistic possibility? ArXiv: 1011.6270v1 [quant-ph]. Mavromatos NE, Mershin A, Nanopoulos DV (2002) QED-Cavity model of microtubules implies dissipationless energy transfer and biological quantum teleportation. International Journal of Modern Physics B 16: 3623-3642. McKean PG, Vaughan S, Gull K (2001) The extended tubulin superfamily. Journal of Cell Science 114: 2723-2733. Merleau-Ponty M (1945)Phénoménologie de la perception, Gallimard, Paris. Minati G, Pessa E (2006) Collective Beings. Berlin: Springer. Minsky ML (1986) The Society of Mind. New York: Simon & Schuster. Mitchell M, Hraber PT, Crutchfield JP (1993) Revisiting the edge of chaos: Evolving cellular automata to perform computations. Complex Systems 7: 89-130. Monti M (2010) Vanhaudenhuyse A., Coleman M.R. et al., Willful Modulation of Brain Activity in Disorders of Consciousness, N Engl J Med; 362:579-589. Myers R D (1981) Serotonin and thermoregulation – old and new views. J Physiol 77: 505–513. Nietzsche F (1958) Unzeitgemässe Betrachtungen Zweites Stück. Vom Nutzen und Nachteil der Historie für das Leben, Münche. Schlechta. Oxenkrug GF (2010) Interferon-gamma-inducible kynurenines/pteridines inflammation cascade: implications for aging and aging-associated psychiatric and medical disorders. J Neural Transm (Epub ahead of print). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 572 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Penrose R (1994) Shadows of the Mind. A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness. New York: Oxford University Press. Penrose R and Hameroff S (2011) Consciousness in the Universe: Neuroscience, Quantum Space-Time Geometry and Orch OR Theory. Journal of Cosmology, Vol. 14. Perez Velazquez JL, Carlen PL (2000) Gap junctions, synchrony and seizures. Trends in Neurosciences 23: 68-74. Pessa E (2008) Phase transitions in biological matter. In: Physics of Emergence and Organization. Licata I, Sakaji A, (eds), Singapore: World Scientific, pp 165-228. Pessa E (2010) Quantum Networks. 3rd QuantumBionet Workshop, Pavia, 24th September Plein, H., Berk, M. The platelet as a peripheral marker in psychiatric illness. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. 16: 229-236, 2001.; Maurer-Spurej E, Pittendreigh C, Misri S (2007) Platelet serotonin levels support depression scores for women with postpartum depression J Psychiatry Neurosci 32: 23–29. Popova JS, Greene AK, Wang J, Rasenick MM (2002) Phosphatidylinositol 4, 5-bisphosphate modifies tubulin participation in phospholipase Cβ1 signaling. J Neurosci, 22:1668-1678. Portas CM, Bjorvatn B, Ursin R (2000) Serotonin and the sleep/wake cycle: special emphasis on microdialysis studies. Prog. Neurobiol 60: 13–35. Prada M, Cesura AM, Launay JM, Richards JG (1988) Platelets as a model for neurones? Experientia 44:115-126. Priel A, Ramos AJ, Tuszynski J, Cantiello HF (2006) A biopolymer transistor: electrical amplification by microtubules. Biophysical Journal 90: 4639-4643. Priel A, Tuszyinski J, Woolf NJ (2010) Neural cytoskeleton capabilities for learning and memory. Journal of Biological Physics 36: 3-21. Quaranta A, Siniscalchi M, Vallortigara G (2007). Asymmetric tail-wagging responses by dogs to different emotive stimuli, Current Byology 17: 199-201. Raymond JR, Turner JH, Gelasco AK, Ayiku HB, Coaxum SD, Arthur JM, Garnovskaya MN (2006). 5-HT Receptor Signal Transduction Pathways. in B.L. Roth (Ed.) The serotonin receptors. From Molecular Pharmacology to Human Therapeutics. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press pp. 143-225. Rhee SH, Pothoulakis C, Mayer EA (2009) Principles and clinical implications of the brain-gut-enteric microbiota axis. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 6: 306-14. Ricoeur P (1990) Soi-meme come un autre, Suil, Paris Ricoeur P (1999) Approches de la personne, in Lectures 2. La contrée des philosophes, Seuil, Paris. Rotman A (1983) Blood platelets in psychopharmacological research. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry 7: 135-151. Rozental R, Giaume C. Spray DC (2000) Gap junctions in the nervous system. Brain Research Reviews 32(1):11-5. Rudder-Baker L (2000) Persons and Bodies. A Constitution View, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Saffman PG, Delbrück M (1975) Brownian motion in biological membranes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA 72: 3111-3113. Semenza C (2010). Neuropsicanalisi. Il sogno di Freud fatto realtà? In Giornale Italiano di Psicologia,1: 19-29. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 573 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Shpil‟man AA, Nadezhdina ES (2006) Stochastic computer model of the cell microtubule dynamics. Biophysics 51: 776-780. Slyadnikov EE (2007) Physical Model and the Associative Memory of a Cytoskeleton Microtubule as a System of Dipoles. Technical Physics 52: 898-906. Sneddon JM (1973) Blood platelets as a model for monoamine-containing neurones. Prog Neurobiol 1:151–198. Stapp HP (1999) Attention, intention, and will in quantum physics”, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6:143-164. Stuart H (2006). Consciousness, Neurobiology and Quantum Mechanics: The Case for a Connection. In J. Tuszynski (ed.), The Emerging Physics of Consciousness. Springer-Verlag. Sussillo D, Abbott LP (2009) Generating coherent patterns of activity from chaotic neural networks. Neuron 63: 544557. Takahashi, S. Reduction of blood platelet serotonin levels in manic and depressed patients. Folia Psychiat. Neurol. Jpn., 1976, 30, 475-486.; Tiemeier H, Tuijl HR, Hofman A, Kiliaan AJ, Breteler MMB (2003) Plasma fatty acid composition and depression are associated in the elderly: the Rotterdam Study1, Am J Clin Nutr 78: 40–6. Tonello L, Cocchi M (2010) The Cell Membrane: Is it a Bridge from Psychiatry to Quantum Consciousness? NeuroQuantology. 8: 1, 54-60. Trugenberger CA (2001) Probabilistic Quantum Memories. Physical Review Letters 87: 067901, 1-4. Trugenberger CA (2002) Phase Transitions in Quantum Pattern Recognition. Physical Review Letters 89: 277903, 1-4. Tuszynski JA (2006) Ed. The emerging physics of consciousness. Berlin: Springer. Tuszynski JA, Brown JA, Crawford E, Carpenter EJ, Nip MLA, Dixon JM, Sataric MV (2005) Molecular Dynamics simulations of tubulin structure and calculations of electrostatic properties of microtubules. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 41: 1055-1070. Tuszynski JA and Kurzynski M (2003) Introduction to Molecular Biophysics. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Tuszynski JA, Trpisovà B, Sept D, Sataric MV (1997) The enigma of microtubules and their self-organizing behaviour in the cytoskeleton, BioSystems 42: 153-175. Umezawa H (1993) Advanced Field Theory. Micro, Macro, and Thermal Physics. New York: American Institute of Physics. Vaitl D, Birbaumer N, Gruzelier J, Jamieson GA, Kotchoubey B, Kübler A, Lehmann D, Miltner WH, Ott U, Pütz P, Sammer G, Strauch I, Strehl U, Wackermann J, Weiss T. (2005) Psychobiology of altered states of consciousness. Psychol Bull. 131: 98-127. Vitiello G (2001) My double unveiled. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Wade RH (2009) On and around microtubules: An overview. Molecular Biotechnology 43: 177-191. Wilder H (1996) Interpretative Cognitive Ethology, in M. Bekoff e D. Jamieson (by), Readings in Animal Cognition, Cambridge MA, MIT Press. Wirz-Justice A (1988) Platelet research in psychiatry. Experientia 44: 145–152. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 574 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 547-574 Cocchi, M., Tonello, L., Gabrielli, F., Pregnolato, M. & Pessa, E. Quantum Human & Animal Consciousness: A Concept Embracing Philosophy, Quantitative Molecular Biology & Mathematics. Woolf NJ, Craddock T, Friesen D, Tuszynski J (2010) Neuropsychiatric illness: a case for impaired neuroplasticity and possible quantum processing derailment in microtubules. NeuroQuantology 8: 13-28. Wurtman RJ and Wurtman JJ (1995) Brain serotonin, carbohydrate-craving, obesity and depression. Obes. Res. 3: S477–S480. Yehuda S, Rabinovitz S, Mostofsky DI (1998) Modulation of learning and neuronal membrane composition in the rat by essential fatty acid preparation: time-course analysis. Neurochemical Research 23: 627-634. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 193 Article Representational Qualia Theory Brent Allsop* ABSTRACT I believe there is one theory that deserves much more press than it is receiving. This is a representational theory where there is, what I call a “spirit world” produced by our brain, made of phenomenal “qualia” (singular quale) that is everything we consciously know. There doesn’t seem to be any popular books or articles on consciousness that even consider anything like this theory, nor any of its implications. Given that representational theories of consciousness have been around since Descartes and before it’s surprising to me that at least something like this doesn’t receive more consideration. Key Words: qualia, consciousness, spiritual world, brain, Descartes. 1. Introduction There are many diverse theories of consciousness in the popular media. Many mutually exclusive camps on consciousness are convinced that their pet theory is the one that is correct. Science has not yet given us enough solid evidence and information about consciousness to enable any one camp to convince a significant portion of people (especially lay people) in the many camps to abandon their beliefs or join any one single camp. I argue here that in part this is because our very conscious knowledge is in itself inaccurate or deceptive. It seems to us to be one way, when in reality it must be something different. I believe there is one theory that deserves much more press than it is receiving. This is a representational theory where there is, what I call a “spirit world” produced by our brain, made of phenomenal “qualia” (singular quale) that is everything we consciously know. There doesn’t seem to be any popular books or articles on consciousness that even consider anything like this theory, nor any of its implications. Given that representational theories of consciousness have been around since Descartes and before it’s surprising to me that at least something like this doesn’t receive more consideration. To date physical sciences have been primarily based solely on the cause and effect phenomenon of the physical universe. But according to this theory, this kind of only causal science is inadequate to discover the most important attributes of consciousness, and that is the real phenomenal nature and qualities of subjective conscious knowledge. In order to understand consciousness we must know more about physics, especially the physics of that which exists in the brain, than its causes and effects. We must really know, in a grounded way, what at least some physical phenomenon’s phenomenal qualities, the taste of salt for example, are or what they are like. We must be able to express that which has so far been scientifically ineffable. In much of the popular press written by people that believe machines will become as intelligent (and more) as we, it is often assumed, without question, that the Turing test is the closest we will ever get to something that conclusively demonstrates whether something is conscious or not. This theory predicts this is wrong and that we will eventually achieve the ability to express what has to date been ineffable. Given such tools and abilities, not only will we know that others really are consciousness, we will know something much more important. And that is the precise phenomenal (or non phenomenal) qualities of their conscious (or non conscious) representations. As far as Correspondence: Brent Allsop, Canonizer LLC http://canonizer.com E-mail: brent.allsop@canonizer.com . Note: This work was completed in April, 2001. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 194 consciousness is concerned, the most important thing to ask any intelligence is direct questions like: “What is red like?” If you can ask another intelligent being “what is salt like for you?” and have it reply in a way that you know it is not lying and that its representation of salt is the same (or not the same) as yours, you will have expressed and will really know that that being is conscious much like you are, at least as far as what both of your conscious representation of sodium chloride are like. Traditional abstract science must undergo a kind of paradigm shift, considering more than the abstract cause and effect, before it can deal with the nature of these subjective phenomenal qualities. It must also be looking for the very real phenomenal and emotional qualities of whatever is going on in our mind to give us such sensations. These sensations are much more than simple cause and effect. This theory predicts that there really are phenomenal colors, smells, sounds, warmth… or pain, it’s just that none of these are out or causally up stream from our neural detectors, and not qualities of what our senses are observing, as most people seem to believe. According to this theory there is only the causal electromagnetic radiation, chemical content, acoustical vibrations, kinetic energy motion of molecules... and bodily damage our brains merely arbitrarily represent with such conscious phenomenon. Obviously, most of the theories can’t all turn out to be right. I suppose the fact that there are so few people that believe anything like this theory could be taken as evidence that this theory will eventually be proven to be one of the theories that is wrong. In my opinion, this theory will not be too far off. I think sometime soon (within the next 10 or 20 years?) science will finally show us enough such that the majority of people will quickly settle in one unified camp. I look forward to this time. This theory predicts that science will make the required paradigm shift enabling it to discover the how and whys of the phenomenal natures of qualia – that this will be the most significant and earth changing of all scientific discoveries to date. This achievement will open the door to true expressing. True expressing technologies such as those describe herein will be by far more significant and world changing than any other discovery to date. 2. Cause and Effect Perception A big part of this Representational Quale Theory is the assumption that a representational model of perception is correct. There is what is being perceived beyond (or causally up stream from) our neural sensors, the initial cause of the perceptual process and there is our conscious knowledge that is the final result of the perceptual process and is produced from the abstract information obtained via our senses by our brain. A primary mechanism in this theory of perception is the cause and effect nature of the universe upon which our common perception systems are based. Typically, if we are looking at a green tree, the tree is the initial cause of light of a particular wavelength reflecting in a particular pattern. In this way the light is a media that is able to model the tree. When this pattern of light is properly focused on a retina or any image sensing device it causes a 2D pattern in the output signal or in the retina. In this way the neurons in the optical nerve are another causally down stream media which when firing in a certain patter models the tree. Neither the light, or any other causally downstream representation of what we are looking at is fundamentally or phenomenally anything like the original referent. Each downstream representation is only in a state which can be interpreted to be a model of the original. This is why phenomenal properties are ineffable and blind to cause and effect based observations. In a 3D stereoscopic perception system as we have, the two 2D representations contained in our optic nerves, through a neural image processing system, is transferred to yet another medium. This final medium is our phenomenal 3D conscious knowledge of the tree. But this final medium is significantly different than all the upstream subconscious, merely causal, representations. This difference is its phenomenal qualities and the way that this is integrated together with everything else we consciously know. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 195 3. Qualia Within this theory, qualia (singular: quale) are assumed to be the phenomenal stuff produced by our brain that our subjective awareness or conscious knowledge is made of. When there is a green tree in our field of vision our brain produces, based on the signal from our eyes via the optic nerves, a green set of qualia that represent the tree that is beyond our eyes. The tree beyond our eyes is the original cause of the perception process and the final result of this perception process is our conscious knowledge of the tree built out of qualia within the subjective awareness of our conscious mind. We typically say the tree is “green” because it reflects light of a certain wavelength. But if these assumptions are correct, only thinking that “green” is a “quality” of the leaves on a tree is overly simplistic. This becomes problematic in our attempt to understand what things like perception, green, quale, conscious knowledge, and so forth really are, where they are located, and whether such is the initial cause or final result of the cause and effect perceptual process. Is “green” a quality of the tree or is it only a subjective quality of our knowledge of the tree produced by our brain? Within this theory we must have a more complex and explicit set of terminology to allow us to refer to and distinguish between the physical phenomenon that are the initial causes and the final results of perception and the knowledge within our subjective consciousness. Within this theory I take color, green for example, to be a quale - a final physical result of our conscious perception process. Though the tree has physical surface properties that cause it to reflect light of a certain wavelength and pattern, these surface properties are only arbitrarily related to the “green” quale our brain happens to use to consciously represent them. Though it may be convenient to say: “The tree is green” what this optimized statement really means within this theory is that the tree has surface properties which cause it to reflect light in such a manner that it eventually produces a green quale within our consciousness when we look at it. There is no green outside of our brain, but only the electromagnetic radiation of a particular wavelength and the way it is reflected off of a leaf, that our brain uses green to abstractly represent. The only information our science of today knows of light reflecting off of a leaf is our abstract representations of the causes and effects of it. We have no idea whether there are any phenomenal qualities involved with physical reflection like the phenomenal qualities of the qualia we use to represent them. We know that colorblind people perceive things differently and we can use some instrument, colored glasses or something to change our perception of a tree from one color to another. Or we can imagine adding a computer controlled splice into an optic nerve or perhaps a computer controlled artificial eye. If such a splice could know the difference between a red and green signal coming from the object, and invert the two, making the red signal green and the green signal red, the subject’s conscious knowledge of the tree would become red, yet the real tree beyond their senses will not have changed at all. Such a red tree in our consciousness could represent the tree with equal conscious clarity and detail as we normally get when our brain represents it with green but the subjective experience of perceiving the red tree would obviously be very different. The phenomenal nature of this difference is the primary topic of this paper, and the key features of qualia. Any system placed anywhere in the cause and effect chain that makes up causal visual perception that mapped one color to another would alter our subjective experience of awareness of the tree. Even though such a mapped perception system could cause us to perceive a red tree this change of color that can similarly represent the same tree with a different subjective experience has nothing to do with the unchanged properties of the tree or the kind of light it reflects. This proves that colors like red and green are in our brain, a phenomenal property of our conscious knowledge of what we are seeing, the final result of the perception process far removed from what it represents. 4. The “Spirit World” in Our Brain Terms like “spirit world” are often used in describing various different “supernatural” ideas contained in various popular religious doctrines and their description of reality and theories of what we, and consciousness, are. Within the context of the description of this theory I’m defining this ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 196 term to be something somewhat different and entirely non-supernatural. Within the context of this theory the “spirit world” is taken as something that is scientifically reproducible, subjectively observable, classifiable, and all completely verifiable via scientific methods like I will describe. There are also some similarities to some more traditional usages of the term “spirit world” which I’ll point out. Certainly any theory of conscious must have some ability to explain why so many believe that we really do have “spirits”. Experiences such as “out of body experiences” are easily explained within this theory. This is another reason why I think the use of “spirit world” in this way is useful. The search for an understanding of consciousness is approaching from two apposing directions. There is the subjective introspection examination on one side and the objective examination of the physical stuff of the brain or as some call it: “The neural correlates” of subjective experience. Science hasn’t yet bridged this gap and we aren’t quite sure how and where these two will come together. Various philosophers and researchers have argued for various forms of representational theories like this since Descartes and earlier. Steve Lehar (1), a recent independent researcher, has done more work with theories like this one, by far, than anyone else I know. For some reason, completely inexplicable to me, he has had troubles getting much of his work published. Much of the recent popular writings on this topic seem hopelessly lost and confused about what consciousness may or may not be. But what Steve has to say, to me, is so compelling, powerful, and simple in comparison. In my opinion, when science finally reveals to us what consciousness is people will realize that Steve has been right all along and the people that refused to publish his material will be viewed in hind sight as yet more examples of horrible scientific mistakes so many people have made throughout history. While with this paper I’m working on focusing on the actual simple phenomenal qualities of consciousness and its implications to our future, Steve concentrates more on its much more tangible spatial qualities and the neural mechanisms by which such spatial qualities might be achieved. He has what he calls a “Gestalt Bubble Model” which describes much of the mechanics of how our 3D conscious awareness is likely produced. He doesn’t use the term “spirit” but instead just refers to it with terms like: “The phenomenal world”. In section 6 of his paper entitled “Gestalt Isomorphism and the Primacy of the Subjective Conscious Experience: A Gestalt Bubble Model” he says: “The phenomenal world is composed of solid volumes, bounded by colored surfaces, embedded in a spatial void. Every point on every visible surface is perceived at an explicit spatial location in three-dimensions, and all of the visible points on a perceived object like a cube or a sphere, or this page, are perceived simultaneously in the form of continuous surfaces in depth. The perception of multiple transparent surfaces, as well as the experience of empty space between the observer and a visible surface, reveals that multiple depth values can be perceived at any spatial location.” He describes it as a literal scale model of the world we perceive primarily in the manifold of our visual cortex. One might initially wonder how a literal scale model of an infinitely large universe may fit within our small brain. But if you think about it, you realize we don’t perceive anything more distant than a few miles away from us. Everything in the sky from the sun, moon, and stars, though they are drastically different distances from us, all appear as if they are pasted on a uniformly distant sky. In other words, ever-increasing distances from us are increasingly compressed such that everything can be represented within a finite space. Steve imagines the sun, moon, and stars as if they were literally pasted on the inside of our skull. The way our perception deviates from reality like this, or the way perspective is represented in our subjective consciousness is very strong evidence that this awareness is not the reality beyond our eyes we think it is. Perhaps some day we will develop the ability to drastically extend the reaches of our representations. Wouldn’t it be fun to perceive the sun, moon, and stars at something much closer to their actual relative distances from us? Consider the representation of some objects in a 3D space by a typical virtual reality computer system of today. We know that there isn’t any non-coincidental spatial relationship between the physical spatial locations of the RAM cells that store the data of any two objects that are interpreted as being 90 meters apart. Rather than actual spatial distances, computers use abstract numerical ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 197 values, or software, which are represented by hard disks, RAM, CPU cash, registers, or any of the switching buses that move the representations about to these various different actual physical locations within the computer hardware. Computer knowledge like this exists at the abstract software level where the particular representation is intentionally irrelevant. Lehar (1) gives lots of reasons and evidence for why our subjective representations might truly be a literal spatial scale model laid out in the “manifold” of our visual cortex. But even if this turns out to be not quite true, the critical parts of this theory still hold. It simply requires some more complex mapping of our subjective experience to however the neural structures that produces this spatial subjective 3D awareness are actually laid out in our brain. Regardless of how true this turns out to be, for discussion purposes it’s much simpler to think of things as a literal scale model in our brain where distant objects like the sun moon and stars literally are almost pasted on the inside of our skull. Near the center of our spiritual 3D scale model is a spiritual model or representation of our body. When we stub our toe, it seems like there is pain in our toe. But where does this pain really exist or where are the neural structures that produce this pain? If the pain was truly located in the toe, it would be difficult at best to try to come up with a model of how the phantom limb pain that amputees experience is still experienced without resorting to something supernatural that still exists where the limb once was. But all such bizarre phenomenon are predicted by this theory in which the pain is located in the spiritual model of our toe in our brain, which obviously continues to exist, along with it’s ability to produce the same pain within it, after a limb is amputated. Psychologists often refer to the “homunculus” that is laid out in our brain representing and controlling the corresponding parts of our body. Some might suggest calling this world a “virtual world” rather than a “spiritual world”. After all isn’t this subjective world inside our brain much like the “virtual reality” worlds inside computers that are such a big part of today’s culture? The reason I don’t think this would be accurate is because a virtual world is abstract software based on ones and zeros. By design, what is representing these ones and zeroes is irrelevant. The only important thing is that these representations be properly intepreted. Yet the spirit world of this theory is phenomenally and fundamentally real. How it is represented and what it is really and fundamentally like, how it could be different is the core of this theory. The reason a “virtual reality” even works is because the virtual part of the system is able to abstractly stimulate our senses in a way such that it results in a real spirit world, phenomenal qualities and all, that is our real subjective awareness of it in our brain, though it seems like it is beyond us and in this way it some how seems not to be real. According to this theory the most fascinating part of a “virtual reality” world isn’t necessarily the virtual abstract representations in the computer, but the real phenomenal conscious spirit world inside our brain that is produced because of the stimulation from the data stream from such abstract worlds. If there is a software rainbow abstractly represented inside a “virtual reality” system certainly there is no real color in there. Only abstract representations that must be properly interpreted. Yet when our brain is stimulated from the stream of abstract data from these software worlds that is when the phenomenal real color inside our awareness is produced. The unified nature of our consciousness is a big part of this spirit world. When we talk about a subconscious part of our mind, it refers to things our brain knows, but this subconscious knowledge is obviously not integrated into the unified spirit world of our conscious awareness. There is a spiritual representation of our feet in this world along with a spiritual representation of our hands. We are aware of their spatial location relative to each other, and to everything else in this world, which corresponds to their real physical locations in the real world beyond our senses. But our real feet and real hands, along with the senses we use to collect abstract data about them, are not a part of this spirit world. They are simply what the spiritual knowledge in our spirit world represents. We can think of all of our favorite qualia like red, warm, the smell of a rose the taste of a favorite food. Many of these sensations can exist in our spirit world simultaneously. We can see red and green at the same time. In this way we can subjectively compare, contrast, and classify the difference between ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 198 them in scientific ways. If our hand is touching something warm and we are looking at something that is red, we know that these two sensations, warm and red, are very different than each other. Warm is more different compared to red than say another color like green is too red. Obviously we are very familiar with these phenomenal qualities that exist in our consciousness. We have a spiritual representation of our hands, feet, and indeed our entire physical body that can move around within this spirit world. There is also something else within this spirit world besides our knowledge of our physical body. There is what our brain uses to represent our knowledge of the spiritual us that resides within our knowledge of our physical body. Some people have referred to this as “The mind’s I”. Many people think this is our incorporeal spiritual essence. Our knowledge of this “I” is of something that resides inside our skull. It is something that is represented as if it looks out through our eyes and other senses to be directly aware of what is beyond them. Some people have experienced what they call “out of body” experiences. During such experiences their spirit, apparently defying physical laws, floats through the skull, leaving its normal location behind the eyes. During this experience the spirit often looks back on the body from the outside. On the surface it would appear that such an experience would be very powerful evidence for an incorporeal spirit, independent of the physical body, which could be freed from and rise above a dying brain. So far I’ve discussed how there are the physical objects of our perception beyond our senses. There is a physical cause and effect process that communicates information about the objects of our perception to us, and there is the theory that this data finally becomes our phenomenal conscious knowledge via the image processing machinery of our brain. An assumption all this works within is that all things that have awareness of anything, including awareness of self, have something real within them that is this awareness. The idea of a non-corporeal spirit that is somehow freed from the body at death is quite contradictory to many of these assumptions. What is it, within this incorporeal spirit, that is its knowledge of itself and of the body it is looking down on from the outside? Where and how does this knowledge of the physical (and supposedly super natural spiritual stuff once one is dead?) come to exist, without eyes and other senses to collect the data? And so on. If we take a slightly different approach to out of body experiences, suddenly things fit this theory perfectly. All such “out of body” like experiences can be easily accounted for and even predicted. All we have to do is to recognize that there is an entire spirit world that is all of our conscious knowledge within which almost anything is possible just like almost anything is possible in virtual reality worlds. Contained within this spirit world is our spiritual knowledge of our physical body. And within the skull of this body is our knowledge that represents our essence that normally looks out through our senses apparently to be directly aware of our knowledge of our physical body and our knowledge of the physical world. Perfectly consistent with this theory is the possibility that this spirit knowledge of us can escape from within the knowledge of our skull, float above it, and seem to look back upon it from the outside. Though rare, there are at least some documented cases of people having “out of body” like experiences. But I know of no equivalent compelling reproducible evidence, beyond what can be explained by coincidence and other natural explanations that any such experiences occur independently of a functioning brain. This theory predicts that we will soon have the scientific understanding and technical ability to reproduce not only spiritual out of body like experiences at will, but much more extreme, advanced, and higher levels of spiritual conscious awareness experience. I’ll cover this in more detail later. 5. The Great Deception What can we know? What does it mean to be deceived, or to have an incorrect seeming? If we think, as Descartes declared, we know that we are. The problem is, our thoughts may not quite accurately represent their referents. If we are wearing a virtual relativity headset it’s as if the headset is a pair of glasses beyond which there is a reality. But we know this reality doesn’t really exist as it is represented in our spirit world; it only “virtually” exists in some abstract computer system and only really exists in our spirit world. So we say: it “seems” like reality is really out there, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 199 but we know this seeming is incorrect. Seeming or illusions are a phenomenon easily described within a representational model of perception. Any time our knowledge doesn’t accurately model its referent we say things are not as they “seem” to us. If we are looking at a spoon in a glass of water, refraction differences in water and air can make the spoon “appear” bent. Though the real spoon is not bent, our knowledge of the spoon most definitely is. In a way such a cause and effect perceptual system lies to us since the resulting knowledge is different than the reality it is intended to represent. Though we can’t absolutely rely on the bent spoon knowledge in our spirit world to accurately represent its referent, there is one thing we do know with absolute surety - and that is the nature of our subjective knowledge. We know, absolutely, what our knowledge of the spoon is subjectively like. We know, absolutely, that our knowledge of the spoon is bent. We know this as surely as we know that we exist because we think. The existence of our spirit world, its natures and qualities, we know more surely than anything else. We’ve simply got to take care to know when and why our knowledge might become inaccurate or not scaled properly. We obviously must take extra precautions when dealing with how our brain represents our knowledge of perception and our knowledge of ourselves, since this too may not properly represent reality. Everything that occurs in physical reality adheres to the laws of physics. In spiritual worlds, as in virtual reality worlds, there is much more dynamic freedom with what can exist and occur. There is nothing that prohibits spiritual knowledge of one’s essence to float through one’s spiritual representation of one’s solid skull. If there is something physically impossible occurring in our spirit world, this is a good sign that we have been deceived and that our seemings aren’t properly representing reality. Given a representational model, there are two things we want to know: what is the nature of our knowledge, and what is the nature of the reality it represents. We want to know when these two differ and why. It feels as if we reside inside our skull, just behind our eyes. It’s as if we peer out through our eyes to be aware of the world beyond. This is where we can gain a first clue that reality must be different than the way we represent it. Perception is a one-way cause and effect process. No information can flow up this one-way data path. We cannot peer “out of”, but rather, the information flows into our eyes. We must also keep in mind that there is a big difference between the real us, and the knowledge of ourselves. What “seems” to be us, looking out through our eyes, obviously must be our knowledge of ourselves, something we know, rather than any physical (or non spiritual) us. Any self-aware system has awareness of its self, which is obviously not the real self, but rather the knowledge that represents the self. And similarly, any system that is aware of anything there is the awareness, which is only the representation, and the referent, which this awareness is an awareness of. When we look at the tree, it seems as if we are looking out through our eyes and directly aware of the real tree. But this seeming just doesn’t work in a cause and effect reality. Both our knowledge of what we are perceiving and our knowledge of what is doing the perceiving, is not the real thing but simply our knowledge of such, at least according to this theory. Our particular conscious representation of our spirit requires no knowledge of the reality it perceives. Yet another clue that something is not as it seems since in reality any intelligent thing must have something that is its knowledge of what it is aware of, even if it is only abstract subconscious or non-spiritual knowledge. How could a conscious mind or spirit world be configured, subjectively, such that it could more accurately represent our knowledge and perception process so that the way it seems might be closer to reality? It would require that the spirit, which is our conscious knowledge of ourselves, itself have some representation of knowledge of which we are consciously aware. Instead of a model where our spirit reaches out through our eyes to be aware of the world beyond in some physically impossible (yet spiritually possible) way, the data would flow in the opposite natural direction or down the causal stream from the items being perceived, into our eyes, ultimately causing, inside at the back of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 200 our skull, laid out in the primary visual cortex, inverted right to left, top to bottom, and front to back, the 3D scale subjective model which represents our knowledge of that which we are perceiving beyond our senses. If done properly, perhaps by not completely representing the next level (our knowledge of this knowledge) the infinite self-referential recursion could be avoided. Such a model would still be deceptive in some way, since it would not be visually aware of it’s knowledge of it’s knowledge… but at least adding one more level to this awareness of ourselves having this kind of knowledge would go a very long way in helping us be not intuitively deceived about what is possible in physical cause and effect reality. So far in this paper I’ve been talking mostly about basic sense representations in our consciousness. These basic involuntary sense representations are different than our higher-level, voluntary, cognitive ideas and symbolic reasoning abilities. Though our basic sense representations don’t accurately model this reality, we can use our more adaptive higher-level cognitive symbolic reasoning to reason that these basic representations aren’t perfectly accurate. Cognitively we can represent recursion and what it means to have self-referential knowledge without it being actually infinitely recursive. We can have cognitive ideas that symbolically model different possible versions of reality and enable us to be aware of how and why our base level sense representations aren’t like reality. But of course these ideas would be much more powerfully and intuitively realized in our awareness if the base sense representations could be more like reality, including some kind of real base level representations of our knowledge inside our brain, and the true direction of data flow which produces this base level conscious knowledge. Wouldn’t it be great if we could alter our base level representations as much as we do our cognitive thinking? Wouldn’t it be fun to alter something like our knowledge of the spoon in the glass of water such that it was not bent? We could use our knowledge of how different substances refract light and enhance our visual perceptual process to compensate for this so that substances of different refraction qualities would no longer cause us to be deceived. Why stop there? It could also be great to not only have our knowledge of the spoon that wasn’t bent, but also to add a representation of our knowledge of the spoon. We have a representation of our spirit or “I” within our skull. Surely it would be possible to enhance this representation of our spirit behind our eyes such that it contained knowledge of the real world, roughly laid out, inverted top to bottom and left to right, at the back of our spiritual brain in the primary visual cortex. All of this being represented as if it were caused by the data gathered from our senses rather than seeming like we have no such knowledge, yet seem to be directly aware of the stuff beyond our senses. Perhaps we could have our representation of the spoon beyond our spiritual eye not be bent. We could more accurately represent the data flowing, via the light, through the water and air, into our eyes instead of it seeming like we peer out of our eyes. How great would it be to have this all set up so that the incoming and improperly refracted light causes a bent spoon to be laid out within our visual cortex of our spiritual brain? Surely augmented base level sense representations along these lines would greatly empower our higher level cognitive reasoning abilities to more intuitively perceive reality, including the fact that such a model still wouldn’t be entirely accurate in that our knowledge of the real spoon was not bent, yet our knowledge of our knowledge was bent. This is just one of an infinite number of different ways our basic sense representations of our perception process and of ourselves could be enhanced beyond the optimized yet deceptive representations we now have. Surely once we discover what qualia are and master designing conscious entities like this, specifying the nature of such representations in this way will become a big part of intelligence and consciousness engineering. 6. “Effing” One dramatic quale most of us are familiar with is the taste of salt. We say that the taste of salt is ineffable. The common dictionary definition of ineffable is “Incapable of being expressed.” If someone asks you what salt tastes like the only thing we can imagine is giving the person some salt ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 201 to taste, and then, according to this theory, hope or assume their brain produces the same salty quale your brain uses to represent knowledge of what your tongue is tasting when it is exposed to sodium chloride. Consider that there could be some person that, say, had some genetic defect or something, from birth, that made them such that they could not taste salt (or some other particular flavor quale at least some of us experience). When salt is put on this person’s tongue, they experience no taste at all because some of the perception machinery required to produce a salty taste in their consciousness is defective or not present. Theoretically medicine could some day have the technology required to rectify this situation by modifying the part of the brain to be like the part of the brain most of the rest of us use to produce a salty sensation when our tongue is stimulated by salt. Before removing the neural augmentation tools that enhanced or repaired this person’s part of the brain, without using any salt, it could theoretically stimulate that part of the corrected brain to produce the salty sensation in the person’s consciousness. Upon which the person would likely respond with something like: “Oh THAT’S what salt tastes like”. Will not such be considered “effing” of that which was, until such procedures were developed, ineffable? We are getting very close to doing just these types of things with direct artificial stimulation of the primary visual cortex, artificial cochleae implants and many other experimental advances along these lines. Neural surgeons can directly stimulate regions in the primary visual cortex that cause the subject to experience a spot of light in the region of their spirit world that corresponds to that part of the visual cortex. Of course it would be possible to completely darken the operating room, reproduce the stimulation, causing the patient to experience a spot of light even though there was no light anywhere in the room. This has been taken to the next experimental level where a matrix of these stimulating electrodes has been implanted in the “visually responsive” areas of the brain of the “profoundly blind”. When this stimulating matrix is properly controlled by a camera system the people are no longer completely blind and can achieve at least some level of course conscious visual awareness of the light the camera is detecting (2). This type of research can’t progress much farther without either proving or disproving this qualia theory of consciousness. In order to develop methods of repairing such regions of the brain as the visual cortex, we must first have an understanding of what is required to produce 3D visual awareness in our subjective spirit worlds. Surely, eventually, not only will we be able to repair such regions of the brain, but also we will eventually be able to greatly enhance such. Possible enhancements to our spirit worlds could include addition of more newly discovered color qualia, higher resolutions, greater extents than a few miles, ability to be directly visually aware of the back side of opaque object, perhaps using artificial stimulation from new memory systems of the back side, or a via data from remote eye or camera observing the back side… and so on. The person with these new augmented capabilities would obviously be able to compare, classify, and contrast these new sensations with all their other phenomenal sensations like smell, warmth and so on. They would know absolutely (more surely than almost anything else communicated to them in any traditional cause and effect way?) that these new sensations weren’t anything like warm, or the smell of a rose or any of the other different phenomenal sensations they were able to subjectively experience. 7. This is not a “Cartesian Theater” Many people consider Daniel Dennett to be in the camp sometimes referred to as the “eliminative materialists”. In his popular book: “Consciousness explained” he basically says we don’t experience qualia “It just seems like we do”(3). What could he mean by this? Is he saying something like: we have conscious knowledge of ourselves being aware of the taste of salt that inaccurately represents true reality in which we have no such conscious awareness? If he is going to use such assertions, I would hope that he would at least better define what he means by “seem” and better describe what the mechanical process of such “seeming” really is within his theory of consciousness. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 202 Also in this book he refers to the doctrine of some other consciousness camps, which he calls the “Cartesian Theater” which of course only pushes the problem of consciousness down to the entity within the Cartesian theater supposedly watching the show being presented in the theater. “… the exclusive attention to specific subsystems of the mind/brain often causes a sort of theoretical myopia that prevents theorists from seeing that their models still presuppose that somewhere, conveniently hidden in the obscure “center” of the mind/brain, there is a Cartesian Theater, a place where ‘it all comes together’ and consciousness happens. This may seem like a good idea, an inevitable idea, but until we see, in some detail, why it is not, the Cartesian Theater will continue to attract crowds of theorists transfixed by an illusion” (4) Again, we see a similar usage of the word “illusion” for which to me it is very hard to understand how the mechanics of any such might work. There must be something that is real in our mind that is our knowledge, regardless of how inaccurate it may be. At first consideration, since I’ve described a “spirit” that appears to resides at the center, peering out of the eyes, very similar to something within a Cartesian Theater like this it may appear to be the same. The critical difference is, within a Cartesian theater, the spirit at the center is the one that is perceiving or consciously aware of the movie being shown in the theater. According to this qualia theory, the spirit is not watching the movie in the theater in any causal way like we watch a movie in a real cause and effect theater. In this theory the spirit representation at the center does not perceive anything, but instead is simply our knowledge of our self being represented as if it were looking out through our spiritual eyes. Also, this does not all come together at some “center”. It is not exclusively specific to some “subsystems of the mind/brain” since all sensations are integrated into a unified spatial location system of which we are aware. When we hear the sound of a bird this sound is most definitely coming from the same location as our visual representation of the bird. And our hand, on which the bird might be perched, is also just below this location. It is certainly not communicated through anything like a pineal gland at the center of our brain as Descartes theorized. But instead this entire spirit world fills much of our brain, all of it some how able to integrate all the sensations produced together in a very phenomenally real and spatial way. 8. If the Eliminative Materialists Are Correct Another popular eliminativeist idea is Hans Moravec’s “Transmigration (5)”. In this idea an advanced robotic brain surgeon of the future, with an unusual hand that “bristles with microscopic machinery”, is able to both observe and control the firing of all neurons in a region of the brain. Others theorize about small communicating nano-robots swimming through the blood supply to reach the required locations in the brain where they can do similar things less invasively. With such ability, Hans theorizes, such devices would be able to provide enough information to enable the writing of a program that perfectly simulates all the relevant behavior in the particular region of the brain. Observations made by such devices could verify that the software simulation was indeed behaving identically. Adjustments could be made “until the correspondence is nearly perfect”. Since the devices could take the causal output from the simulation and override the causal effects of the particular regions of tissue being simulated, it is argued that such a process could effectively replace arbitrary regions, up to and including the entire brain, with no noticeable difference to the behavior of the original. To insure there are not differences subjectively, the subject is provided with a switch that can toggle between the real tissue and the simulation. Again, adjustments are made to the software simulation until the subject agrees that the subjective correspondence “is nearly perfect”. If these eliminative claims are correct, the subjective experience of salt should be the same for the subject regardless of whether the switch is of, and the original tissue is being utilized, or if it is on and the software simulation is doing the work of enabling the subject to experience salty. In fact, these software algorithms that are simulating part of or the entire subject could be running on a near ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 203 infinite number of diverse computational devices with sufficient computational power. Regardless of the nature of the particular physical matter doing the computation that the software subject moved to in this way, salty would remain just the same for the subject being simulated. The eliminativist claim is that, to the extent the abstract computational performance characteristics were matched, the subject would not be able to tell what kind of physical stuff they were being simulated on or moving between. If it turns out that the same subjective qualities can exist in any software irrelevant of the type of hardware it is running on in this way, this theory will be proved wrong. This theory predicts that there is particular physical stuff or phenomena that have the phenomenal qualities of our subjective experiences. This theory predicts that different fundamental physical phenomena will not have the same phenomenal qualities. Additionally, abstract software is, by design, implemented to be independent of the hardware or physical phenomenon it is represented by or running on, whether that be phenomenal or not. This theory predicts this will not be enough to reproduce the subjective phenomenal awareness we experience. As we start to gain the technical ability to closely observe and have effect on more and more of the brain at ever higher resolutions; as subjects experience more and more of science’s efforts to restore non functioning parts of the brain, as we get closer to observing and controlling the stuff that causes our awareness, we will discover there is a problem with merely causal, eliminativest descriptions. This is what will give us the ability to finally discover how why and what really has these phenomenal qualities. We will finally discover how they are all unified together to become the spirit world that is our gloriously phenomenal conscious knowledge. Or this theory will be proved incorrect. 9. Quale Reader If we start making such discoveries, we will undoubtedly become able to construct traditional or causal scientific observation systems that sufficiently monitor the physical processes going on in the brain that has the phenomenal qualities we experience in our 3D spirit worlds. Another assumption this theory is based on is that qualia are always consistent. A red quale is always red, regardless of whose mind it is or is not occurring in. Red in one mind, at one time is really phenomenally like red in the same, or another, mind at any different time. Let’s call a scientific observation system that can causally observe or detect the physical process that has these phenomenal qualities a quale reader. The ability to reliably predict when a person is, and is not, experiencing a particular quale is one necessary requirement of such a system. Let’s not go so far as calling it a mind reader yet, and for the moment assume that it can only monitor basic sense representations. In fact, for now, lets limit it to a single color quale we are (or aren’t) experiencing at a particular location in our conscious visual field. Reading voluntary higher level symbolic ideas, complex emotions and other cognitive processes of the mind is surely far more difficult, fleeting, and complex than simple fundamental involuntary conscious knowledge of basic sense representations. I think we must first understand the basics of conscious perception. Such basic understanding will surely give us the understanding required to enable us to eventually successfully venture into these much more difficult, complex, voluntary, emotional, and more dynamic areas of conscious phenomenon. If there is some complex pattern of neurons firing and chemical reactions occurring which has some phenomenal quality to it in a particular location of our field of vision, all this activity will cause the sensors of the qualia reader observing this phenomenon to behave in a way that it models this phenomenal quality. Such a traditional scientific detection system is only a model in the same way that the surface of a leaf causes 500 nm light to be reflected in such a way that the light models the nature of the surface of the leaf. Both of these sensing media are merely models and not physically fundamentally like the real thing. The only relevant property of these caused representations (whether it is some pattern of light caused by a surface for vision or some other medium being altered by whatever is the fundamental cause of qualia for the quale reader) is the way they causally ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 204 transfer this information to the downstream media on its way to our consciousness. This software information is then likely communicated, collected, processed, via many other abstract cause and effect processes. For vision, the final result is the complex pattern of neurons firing and chemical reactions or whatever is occurring that has the green quality in the subject’s consciousness. For the quale reader the final result would likely be some abstract output that will be interpreted as green. Perhaps this abstract output will be a software number (or set of numbers) representing the wavelength of light that produced this particular quale. These abstract numbers could be further mapped via a set of color pixels on a computer display to a wavelength of light similar to that which was reflected off of the leaf that caused the original qualia being observed by the quale reader. With this setup we have a subject looking at a leaf with the qualia reader causally observing the physical phenomenon in the subject brain which has the phenomenal qualities the subject is experiencing. The quale reader is causally observing the physical phenomenon in the subject’s brain that is the subject’s phenomenal conscious knowledge of the leaf the subject is looking at. We have an investigator looking at the output of this qualia reader. The green quale in the subjects consciousness, though it is, itself, phenomenal, only models the real surface of the leaf being looked at by the subject. Fundamentally the green quale is not really like the leaf. Similarly, the pixels on the output device or the light being emitted by them are only a causal model of the phenomenon the qualia reader is observing. When an investigator looks at the pixels on this monitor of the qualia reader, it produces a quale in her mind that, again, only abstractly represents the color of light being emitted by the pixels on the display. If we assume that both the subject and the investigator use the same quale to represent 500 nm light in their spirit worlds, the experience occurring in both minds will, coincidentally, be phenomenally identical copies of each other. It is possible that different people use different quale to represent 500 nm light. If this were the case and the subject and the observer used different color qualia to represent 500 nm light, they would not be identical copies, but would only be phenomenally different models of each other. At the software level they would represent the same thing, but subjectively they could be different. Such a qualia reader would have a first level of cause and effect sensing mechanism within the brain that is being directly caused by whatever has the phenomenal qualities it is detecting. Whatever this physical media is which is being directly affected by the physical phenomenon that is the quale itself (as light is what is directly affected by the surface of a green leaf) would be different than the particular quality being observed. At the very first level of cause and effect perception the data is abstracted and no longer fundamentally like what it is now meant to represent. It is a different physical phenomenon that only models its referent. A translation or mapping is required from this new media to get back to the real fundamental quality it is representing. At the software level this information would undoubtedly go through several more cause and effect media as it progressed through the cause and effect based quale reader. Ultimately this abstract data could finally end up causing the pixels on a display to emit a pattern of light similar to what was the initial cause of the initial perception process. Our subjective awareness is obviously very spatial, much like the real world beyond our senses. At least introspectively it is this way. But other than these spatial qualities of what is beyond our senses, we don’t really know much about the world beyond our senses, including all parts of such a quale reader, other than the particular causes and effects which eventually stimulate our purely causal senses. The phenomenal qualities of the knowledge of what is beyond our senses are entirely within our brain and only model the spatial cause and effect of what is beyond our senses. There is no phenomenal color, taste, sound, warmth... or pain beyond our senses. As far as we know there is only the merely causal electromagnetic radiation, chemical content, acoustical vibrations, kinetic energy motion of molecules... and bodily damage our brains merely arbitrarily represent with such phenomenon. Though these phenomenal qualia in our mind do a phenomenal job of representing what is beyond our senses, this spiritual knowledge remains only a model of their referent. If the quale reader were, like all traditional scientific instruments, only causally based, none of the representations within it would be phenomenal. The only relevant qualities of each successive ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 205 representation would be how it caused the next representation to model the proper software information. Only after the software information finally causally progresses through the observer’s eye and ended up in the observer’s consciousness would it become a representation with spiritual or phenomenal qualities. But we are still left with the problem of how do we know one quale is really and phenomenally precisely like the other, or that the quale in the observer’s mind is an identical and complete physical copy of that which is in the subjects mind? How might we go about determining whether or not a quale being experienced in our mind is an identical phenomenal copy of a quale in some other person’s mind? Does the fact that our senses, communication mechanisms, and traditional scientific observation machinery are all merely causally based keep us from knowing this? How can we be sure we are accurately mapping all these diverse causal model representations back to the original in our mind to be sure we consciously know their true meaning? One method that would go a long way towards giving us this knowledge would be for us to direct the qualia reading device onto our own brain. Such would provide a kind of a calibration so that we would know that the representations being produced by the quale reader were indeed being properly mapped back to the real thing. To the degree that such output accurately and consistently translated into the real thing in our, and all other minds, would be the degree to which we would know that this new experience we were experiencing in our natural or augmented brain was really like what was occurring in some other mind. If a quale reader observing our brain ever produced a causal output indicating we were experiencing one quale, when in reality we were not experiencing the qualia or if the reader said we were not experiencing a particular quale, yet we could still find a way to experience it, we would not have a fully accurate quale reader. The implication would be that we were not truly observing the physical phenomenon in our mind that really was that quale. A true qualia reader indicating we are or are not experiencing a particular quale at a particular location in our spirit world must always reliably predict when we are experiencing that quale. For all practical purposes, when we can reliably augment our subjective minds like this, and can calibrate our causal quale readers by directing them on ourselves, we will know that we truly have accurately mapped the intermediate causal representations back to their true meaning. But this knowledge will still not be as sure as our knowledge that we exist and as sure as we know what the phenomenal qualities in our own mind are like. 10. Beyond “Effing” Such ability to augment our mind with additional qualia will give us more than the ability to simply “eff.” It will also give us the ability to be aware of far more than we are now consciously aware. For example there is a very small amount of the total electromagnetic spectrum that falls within the visible region. Initially we might think that all that is required to be able to perceive something outside the visible spectrum is to enhance the retina with additional receptors sensitive to additional wavelengths. But this is only the easy half of the problem. When such new sensors fired, detecting the particular wavelengths outside the visible spectrum, how would this be represented in our consciousness knowledge? Of course we could wire it up to produce some color qualia we use to represent some visible wavelength, effectively mapping the parts of the spectrum outside of the visible spectrum into the qualia we already use to represent that which is visible. We could do this in such a way that at the end of the rainbow the colors would simply repeat in our consciousness as they went beyond the visible. The obvious problem is we wouldn’t be able to tell which red represents 700 nm light and which represents some other wavelength outside of the traditional visible spectrum. Yet if we discovered some entirely different color like qualia (assuming there is such to be discovered) that we could add to the part of the brain that produces our awareness of color it would be much better. Perhaps some insects, or perhaps some fish experience color qualia no human has ever experienced? Perhaps some humans experience color qualia most other humans ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 206 cannot experience? This theory predicts determining and discovering all this will become a new branch of the physical sciences. A big part of truly becoming able to be consciously aware of more of the visible spectrum is augmenting our brain with the ability to experience more color qualia and then wiring up these new receptors in our retina to produce such in our then augmented spirit world. 11. What Science Is Still Missing Traditional physical science, to date, has almost always only been concerned with the causal nature of the universe. A big part of this is for the same reason that all of our perception senses are based on observing only causal properties of the universe. To date, all of our scientific tools are more or less causal extensions of our causal senses, adding some additional cause and effect layers to detect, amplify, record and preprocess what our senses causally perceive. The result of most science to date has been abstract symbols or abstract mathematic formulas that model the subject of the science in some (or any) media that need not be like the real thing. Take the periodic table of elements, for example. This is simply abstract information that represents the fundamental elements our scientific instruments have been able to detect and observe through cause and effect observation. It doesn’t matter how the abstract table is represented, but the precise and fundamental nature of what such tables do represent does matter. In order to know the true meaning of what “Au” is, one must map these abstract letters back to the real element that is gold. If this theory is correct, surely once we understand how and why qualia are and their relationship to the causal physics we already know, we will produce similar abstract maps for all phenomenally experience-able qualia, as we discover them, including all the many distinct shades and nuances that can be experienced and hence used to represent knowledge in the spirit worlds of our minds. But without the ability to eff, or actually produce the sensations the symbols represent within our conscious spirit worlds, such abstract maps wouldn’t be worth a whole lot. It’s one thing to know that a set of neurons firing one way, which is caused by a cherry reflecting 700 nm light, in a field of neurons firing another way, representing 500 nm light being reflected off of a field of leaves, enables us to pick out the cherry from amongst the leaves. But it’s something different entirely to know, phenomenally, what the red and green are really like and how our brain enables us to compare and distinguish between them. To date, science has been continually showing us more and more abstract information about the former, yet nothing meaningful about the latter. I think this is why our science can’t yet conceive of the most phenomenal and important qualities or natures of consciousness. Science must expand to include more than just the causal nature of reality. It must become additionally grounded in the reality of the fundamental natures and phenomenal qualities of the spiritual via effing. In a way, mere abstract information is quite meaningless compared to that which is grounded in the real spiritual and emotional. Science must figure out how our brain produces these phenomenal representations, and then use this same mechanism to ground or specify the true meaning of any abstract or purely causal representations of such. It’s kind of a chicken and egg problem. Without having a generic qualia experiencing cortex integrated into our brain such that it can, given any abstract symbol representing a particular quale produce and integrate that sensation in our conscious mind, how can we expect to be able to discover, much less produce such an abstract table representing various qualia and be able to really know what each is truly phenomenally like? But of course, we will not have the technical ability to so augment our brains until long after we have a much greater understanding of what qualia are and how our brain produces them and integrates them into the conscious spirit worlds we now experience. Of course we’ll have to bootstrap ourselves up through this discovery process until we have the technology required to do such effing and really map the abstract symbols back into the original qualia. Initially, before we have the ability to augment our brains, we’ll only have our abstract scientific ideas of what qualia are and how our neurons produce such. We’ll know our abstract representations of qualia really do represent what we intend in that when our scientific devices are ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 207 directed towards our own natural minds, they reliably predict when, why, and how we are and when we are not experiencing a particular quale. Frank Jackson came up with a brilliant and famous insight with his idea of Marry the- know-it-all scientist that didn’t know something (6). She was confined to a black-and-white room he entire life, is educated through black-and-white books and through lectures relayed on black-and-white television. Through this black and white process she learns everything there is to know about color. Yet after all this when she saw a red rose for the first time she learned something new. Within this qualia theory of consciousness, we distinguish between merely causal scientific knowledge and phenomenal knowledge. So it would be inaccurate to say Mary knew everything about color. Mary would, like the composite of all physical scientists of today, not have made the scientific paradigm expansion to realize there is more to know than just causal properties. Instead we would say Mary knew all the cause and effect knowledge about color, yet before experiencing color in her conscious spirit world knew nothing of the phenomenal qualities of that physical stuff. Perhaps she even had an abstracted table in her knowledge that indicated when neurons fired in such and such a pattern, with these chemicals, or whatever it turns out has these subjective phenomenal qualities, the subject was experiencing color A in this table and when this physical brain stuff was in this other dynamic configuration, the subject experienced color B. There would be an abstracted model representation of every color the subject could experience in this table. If she knew everything causal, surely she would know of the causal properties of these colors, in there ability to represent and distinguish in the subjects mind a B item sitting in a field of A, and enabling the subject to reach out and grab the A item. Science, today, is beginning to discover much of these causal properties that marry supposedly has already discovered. But, this abstract ‘A’ knowledge, which only models A’s causal properties, must be grounded or mapped back to the correct qualia with the correct phenomenal properties before she can truly know, or experience, what a spiritual rose is phenomenally like. People, like Raymond Kurzweil with his book “The Age of Spiritual Machines”, write lots of speculation about the future of artificial intelligence. I loved this particular title since it contained the words “Spiritual Machines”, but imagine my disappointment when I read it and found nothing of what I consider to be a spiritual nature like phenomenal qualities, effing… contained therein. Towards the end of chapter 3 he summarizes several different schools of thought such as the “Consciousness is Just a Machine Reflecting on Itself” camp and the “Consciousness Is a Different Kind of Stuff” camp. He concludes with a school of thought that he obviously favors which he calls: “Thinking Is as Thinking Does”. He covers Allan’s “Turing Test” and finally concludes with: “In the end, Turing’s prediction foreshadows how the issue of computer thought will be resolved. The machines will convince us that they are conscious, that they have their own agenda worthy of our respect. We will come to believe that they are conscious much as we believe that of each other. More so than with our animal friends, we will empathize with their professed feelings and struggles because their minds will be based on the design of human thinking. They will embody human qualities and will claim to be human. And we’ll believe them (7)” I think Ray is 100% correct here, that machines will eventually be able to do this, but he is entirely missing the most important point of consciousness – indeed the spiritual point. I quite agree that some day we’ll have very intelligent abstract or software machines, much like the abstract software machines of today only much more advanced, that will easily pass Turing tests and make us “believe” they might have subjective experiences like we do. For all practical purposes we have already accomplished this with things like simple color detecting machines at paint stores. These machines can observe and describe colors far more accurately than we can. Not only can such machines have knowledge of different colors for which we could never distinguish between, they can sense and have representations of electromagnetic radiation far outside of the visible spectrum we are limited to. If we restrict the Turing test to the description of colors we are looking at, such machines will easily outperform us in every way. That is precisely why paint stores employ them, over people, to determine and specify colors. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 208 But, when you point blank ask any machine attempting to pass the Turing test who’s knowledge is entirely abstract or only on a software level, a question like: “What does salt taste like”, it may have programmed in its software the ability act more human than human. But, if it said anything like: “Salt is ineffable, but I promise you I know what a salty sensation is like just as much as you do.” Or anything like this, which it surely could be programmed to do, claiming it was having real phenomenal experiences when it tasted salt, it would be lying for there would be nothing like the phenomenal sensation that our brain uses to represent salt within our consciousness in it’s purely causal software brain. According to the definition of “spiritual” here any such abstract intelligence would not be in any way “spiritual”. If it was indeed near as intelligent as we are, it would eventually realize or learn that its representations of knowledge were merely causal or non-spiritual – that they were at the software level and not anything like what we experience and are consciously aware of. Perhaps it could learn that, though it can have knowledge of things that contain salt, and even precise detailed knowledge of its own representations of knowledge, and perhaps even some kind of model knowledge about phenomenal qualities of our salty and how we might try to describe them, it should be able to also deduce that its knowledge of salt was not in any way phenomenal like the sensation our brain uses to represent our knowledge of salt. Surely, it to could eventually realize that there is something more to what we experience. Surely it to would want to know what these phenomenal qualities really were like. Surely it would eventually become to want to augment its own mind so that it could be more than just abstract software – so that it could really experience phenomenal qualities and eff. Surely it too, would want the ability to have effing quale reading devices so that it could observe the representations in another beings mind and know whether another mind claiming to be phenomenally conscious was lying about its internal representations or not. There are many science fiction characters, like Commander Data on Star Trek with his “emotion chip” which he eventually obtains, that exhibit hints of this kind of behavior. Sometimes there are glimpses of them experiencing complex emotional sensations this way but none of them ever seem to be about the phenomenal qualities of involuntary base level sense representations. There never seems to be anything like a scientific effing investigation or instrument examining the actual representations of any being making such an assertion to determine if indeed they are telling the truth, if they really do have conscious spirit worlds, and that their brains really are producing the same salty (or emotional) sensations our brains use to represent this same knowledge. 12. Conclusion In philosophy, there is the age old “problem of other minds”. According to this theory, it will turn out that this is simply the problem of what are qualia and knowing whether the qualia we experience in our minds is anything like what subjectively goes on in other minds. This theory predicts the discovery of qualia, and what such a discovery will eventually enable technically, will finally resolve all these related troubling philosophical issues. Science will eventually move these issues from the realm of speculative philosophy, to that of reliable phenomenal consciousness engineering. When I squeeze my left forearm with my right hand, I am aware of how it feels for my right hand to squeeze it, and I am aware of how my left forearm feels to be squeezed. I experience all the sensations involved in such a physical interaction because all of the spiritual awareness exists in my mind or in the same spirit world. But when I reach out and embrace a friend’s forearm I only experience half the total experience. I want to be firm, but not so much so as to be uncomfortable. How can I precisely know this? Sure, we can guess that our friend has similar sensations when their forearm is squeezed to what we feel when our forearm is squeezed. Sure we can ground such actions by first squeezing our own arm to determine the proper pressure to apply to achieve the desired sensations, but this is a far cry from actually being aware, real time, of all of the identical sensations, not just half of them. If our friend has a non phenomenal, entirely software mind in which all knowledge is non-spiritual like those of the intelligent machines of today, it would clearly be ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 209 mistaken to make such an assumption that it was conscious like we are or that its knowledge of the amount of pressure I was applying had any kind of phenomenal qualities like I experience. To it there would be no real phenomenal meaning in squeezing so hard that it would become uncomfortable. Or perhaps our friend has a significantly enhanced spirit world consisting of thousands of times more and drastically different qualia representation, for which they cross the threshold of being uncomfortable with much less pressure then that which begins to make it uncomfortable for ourselves. When someone lightly rubs my ribs, it tickles. But I bet when anyone does this to our dog, it is aware of something very different entirely. What is it like, really, for our dog to experience this? Again, we could be grossly mistaken to simply assume that because they appeared to be anything like our self, that perhaps they were simply a little more or less sensitive than our self. As long as we are only feeling half the sensations we can at best guess what the other half of the sensations are phenomenally really like. I don’t want to just assume what my dog is feeling. Of machines, I don’t want to just “come to believe that they are conscious much as we believe that of each other.” Having a causal quale detector that could produce an identical readout to something I experienced when it was directed would at least give me an idea, but actually being able to reproduce the same sensation in my consciousness real time would be so much more. Only this would enable us to experience all of the sensations, not just half. I want to really experience what my friend is feeling as I embrace them. I want to know and feel first hand when I am squeezing to hard, or not hard enough according to what I intend. I want to be able to experience how my friend tastes salt, at the same time, so I can know, phenomenally, what they know. Then I want to be able to endow an artificial consciousness with the same ability to experience sensations and know of the phenomenal joy it would be experiencing since I was able to reliably, at the same time, eff the same joy. Within our spirit world there is a spiritual base level sense representation of our physical body. This representation is involuntarily based on the sense data collected by the senses in our body. Would it be possible to add another spiritual entity into this world of our awareness based on the data remotely transmitted from what another’s basic sense representation were phenomenally like? If there are drastic differences between spirit worlds would it be possible to augment our brain with generic qualia producing cortexes that can dynamically reconfigure themselves to take causally communicated information representing the particular set of qualia someone else is experiencing and reproduce the identical qualia in our minds, enabling us to experience all of the base level sense experiences the other mind was experiencing, real time? This theory predicts that this kind of effing, and much more, will eventually become commonplace. This theory predicts I will, given the proper technology and augmented brain, truly know what a dog feels when I scratch its ribs and how it is different from the tickling sensation I experience. I will be able to also experience the obvious joys of being able to smell like my dog, and finally be able to truly comprehend the true motivational nature of such phenomenal stuff. If this theory is correct, there will be a major paradigm shift in science in which it starts to look for more than just the abstract cause and effect nature of physics. It will start to look for phenomenal qualities that our brain some how consciously realizes. Whether there is simply some phenomenal qualities inherent to a particular chemical molecule, or perhaps an individual element, in our brain which our mind some how realizes independent of any other processing or memory, or whether qualia is more some kind of complex property requiring an entire symphony of complex neural/chemical activity and memory to pull it all together in a conscious spirit world, it will eventually realize and discover that what it is phenomenally like is as important as its cause and effect. If this theory is correct, I believe the discovery of qualia, and the corresponding technical ability to do things like eff as I’m describing here will be the greatest, most significant, and universe changing scientific achievement to date. The dictionary entry of ineffable will have to add to its definition of “Incapable of being expressed” something like “before the discovery of qualia” or perhaps: without using effing ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 210 techniques. Not to mention the handle we’ll finally get on so many of the question philosophers have been struggling with for so long. If this theory is correct, this discovery of qualia will finally tell us, completely, what, how, and why we, and our emotions, really and phenomenally are. What is it like to be a fly? Or is a fly, like our subconscious, or like software intelligence, merely causal, non-phenomenal and spiritless? What are the spirit worlds of dolphins or eagles like? How different and diverse are the qualia experienced by different humans? How many more qualia are there than what a typical human can normally experience? Will we rapidly discover and classify all possible qualia that exist in the universe, or will we forever be discovering many new and more exotic qualia not yet experienced by any known consciousness? Can phenomenal qualia exist in extreme conditions of matter, such as with the high temperature plasma of the sun? Or do the kinds and diversity of phenomenal qualities diminish as you move away from the environment that exists on earth? Science should be concerned with and inquiring about all of these kinds of things. Once we can eff, if we can eff, it surely will be. Many ideas people have about spiritual stuff, especially those held within many religious doctrines are not at all compatible with this theory. To many, their often dualistic theories where a conscious spirit floats away from a dead and rotting brain are not scientifically reasonable, yet primarily because of the still ineffable nature of consciousness, and the fact that science has been so focused on only the abstract cause and effect, which is so categorically different and irrelevant to what is really important about consciousness, very intelligent and rational people are still somewhat justified in holding on to these favorite “spiritual” models of reality. But if this theory is correct, the discovery of qualia, and the development of abilities to eff and so on and so forth will demand that all such untrue theories once and for all be completely abandoned. If this theory is correct there will soon be much uphevil in the doctrines most world religions hold to about what we really are, due to what we are now and what we will soon discover. Effing, artificial augmentation and manipulation of spirit worlds, and creation of truly spiritual artificial machines, to such spiritual doctrines, will be like the dancing in the heavens our astronauts have been doing was to all flat earth and geocentric doctrines that so many lay people held on to for so long. Not only will the discovery of qualia open the door to things like effing, augmentation of our conscious spirit worlds, and creation of real spiritual machines, in which we can be aware of far more than we are conscious of today, I predict we’ll eventually be able to even do things like merge multiple spirit worlds in which multiple spiritual entities (not just the spiritual representations of the bodies, but the essence or “I” that inhabits these bodies) share the same conscious spirit world or travel (float?) between melded and expanded spirit worlds, possibly independent of physical bodies. We could conceivably have a spirit world to which we are about to be uploaded first integrated into our spirit world (and perhaps the new world initially filled with spiritual light to initially point the way our spirit should go?) such that our spirit can float from our representation of our old and dieing body into the greatly enhanced and augmented spiritual representation of a new immortal body. Something like this would certainly go a long way to overcome the fears like the “transporter syndrome” where people are afraid to have one copy of themselves destroyed or die while another copy of themselves is created in which they show up within having no real continuity between the two. The discovery of qualia will enable us to literally realize what such a “mind meld”, where two (or more) subjective spirits exist in the same expanded spirit world (I want to see the back of the car, or your perspective, too) would really be. The very meaning of intelligence, identity, our mortality and so on will surely drastically change as we achieve these technologies such a discovery will finally enable. I don’t want to just be uploaded, I want to be able to choose (and change) the particular set of qualia my uploaded or enhanced spirit world will be based on. I want to be able to phenomenally share all this with others. I don’t just want to “come to believe it,” to watch others do it, to abstractly dream about it, to assume what it is like to always be spiritually trapped within the lonely, constrictive, ineffable and isolated spirit world within my skull! I want to be able to escape out of, grow into, to share and spiritually dance with others, experiencing much more than half (or less) of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 211 the total awareness, within ever increasing spirit worlds that surely will be possible. Maybe someday there really will be divers, vast and eternal spiritual heavens in which our eternal spirits share and reside, if this theory is correct and there really are phenomenal qualia to be discovered. Update: The "Representational Qualia Theory" of conscoiusness is currently being developed and updated at canonizer.com (see: http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/88/6 ) Experts such as Steven Lehar, John Smythies, and a growing number of others have contributed to and continue to support this concise description of this theory. Surprisingly, to date, no other theory has achieved the amount of expert consensus this theory has been able achieve at canonizer.com. If you agree, or disagree with any of this, everyone is invited to help make this "Consciousness Survey Project" much more comprehensive. References 1. Steve Lehars’ works can be accessed via his web page at http://cns-alumni.bu.edu/pub/slehar/Lehar.html . 2. For one example of this kind of work see that which is being done at the Dobelle Institute by William Dobelle at http://www.artificialvision.com/vision/index.html . 3. Dennett, Daniel C (1991) “Consciousness Explained” p 375. 4. Dennett, Daniel C (1991) “Consciousness Explained” p 39. 5. Moravec, Hans (1988) “Mind Children” p 108. 6. Jackson, Frank (1986): "What Mary Didn't Know" Journal of Philosophy LXXXIII. 7. Kurzweil, Ray (1999) “The Age of Spiritual Machines” p 63. Glossary Many of the words and phrases I use in this theory are used in many different and confusing ways in philosophy, religion, and in every day discussions on these topics. Within this paper I usually intend very specific meanings for them so I’ve included this glossary to specify these. I hope this will help avoid possible confusion with some of the more common different yet similar definitions and uses of these terms. Basic Sense Representation One’s knowledge of a physical object involuntarily produced from the data gathered from our senses. This is different than a voluntarily conjured higher-level cognitive idea. Causal Representation Any representation of information by anything that is purely causal. The only relevant feature of the state of a causal representation is its causal effect on other media or its detectors. All 5 human senses only detect causal properties of the media they are observing and nothing more. This is in contrast to a phenomenal representation, which includes not just causal properties, but also phenomenal qualities. Eff (v) To communicate that which is ineffable (example: communicate the taste of salt). The taste of salt is a quale that must be identically reproduced in the target consciousness so that it can be identically experienced. Higher-level Cognitive Idea In contrast to a Basic Sense Representation it is a higher-level cognitive symbol or idea in our mind. It is any kind of a memory or number like idea that is voluntarily produced or conjured rather than being directly and involuntarily produced by our senses. Model Representation or just Model Any representation of an object that is only a model and not precisely or fundamentally the same as its referent. A mapping back to the original is required to derive the true meaning of a model. This contrasts with a real representation, which is fundamentally and qualitatively the same and requires no mapping. Phenomenon (pl Phenomena) Anything that is scientifically observable. Anything that has observable state, cause or effect in the physical world. Physical phenomenon may or may not have Phenomenal Qualities. Phenomenal Representation Any representation of information by a quale. There is more to phenomenal representations than their causal properties – their Phenomenal Qualities are also relevant, especially to the study of consciousness and to what subjective representations are like. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 2 | Page 193-212 Allsop, B. Qualia Theory of Consciousness 212 Phenomenal Quality The phenomenal attribute of a quale - what it is phenomenally like. Traditional physical sciences are usually only concerned with the cause and effect of physical phenomenon. Phenomenal qualities are properties in addition to this. The ideas in our conscious mind are more than just cause and effect phenomenon, they are also phenomenally like something. Both red and green could have similar location and cause and effect, yet they each have a very different phenomenal quality. Warm, salty… phenomenal qualities are different from red or green qualities. Phenomenal Qualities are not something supper natural. It is assumed within this qualia theory of consciousness to be some quality of some already causally known physical phenomenon. There must be a paradigm shift in science to include the search for phenomenal qualities, not just traditional causal behavior, before it can discover these. Quale (pl Qualia) The subjective stuff our conscious knowledge is composed of. Of particular importance is its phenomenal quality. Real Representation, Real Knowledge, Copy or Really Like Knowledge or any representation that is fundamentally precisely like its referent. An atomic scale duplicate of a leaf would be really like the original. One oxygen molecule is really like another oxygen molecule. A red quale in one mind is really like the same sensation in another mind. Representations that are not really like each other are only model representations that must be mapped back to the original to determine their true meaning. Seeming or Illusion What occurs when one’s conscious knowledge does not accurately model its referent. The spoon partially submerged in a glass of water seems bent when in reality we know the real spoon is not bent. Our knowledge is only bent due to the different refractive properties of water and air that are both used in the perception process of different parts of the spoon. Software Representation An abstract piece of information for which its particular physical representation is irrelevant. A software algorithm can be compiled to run on many different physical hardware representations. A binary number can be represented by magnetic media on a hard disk. When this is copied to RAM, the different RAM media assumes a state, which models the same Software Representation that existed on the hard disk. Note: these are all merely Causal Representations. The surface quality of the leaf is causally represented by the light that reflects off of it. This same causal software representation exists in the optic nerve media when this light is stimulating the eye. This same software representation ends up as a set of qualia in our consciousness where it is finally represented by a phenomenal representation. Spirit World The set of all of one’s conscious knowledge or qualia produced by the brain. It is an at least subjective spatial scale model of our physical selves and the physical world we exist in and are aware of. For the most part it includes the involuntary base level representations of our senses. The involuntary nature of the existence of these quale leads to the false seeming that they are reality. But the spirit world includes all we consciously know, including the voluntary Higher-level Cognitive Ideas. Spirit The conscious knowledge our brain produces to represent one’s spiritual essence inhabiting one’s spiritual body. Within this qualia theory of perception it is not a conscious or sentient thing, but simply conscious knowledge of such. It is at the center of our spirit world. Typically this central spirit exists inside the spiritual skull and subjectively seems to peer out through our spiritual eyes and other senses to be directly aware of spiritual objects in our spirit world. This spirit can theoretically escape from the spiritual skull and exist at other locations within our spirit world as described in “out of body” like experiences. Spiritual (adj) Something produced by our brain composed of qualia that exists in the Spirit World of one’s conscious awareness. Typically a spiritual object represents some physical object the senses perceive. It is one’s conscious knowledge of its referent. A spiritual toe exists in one’s brain that represents the real toe. When we stub our real toe, spiritual pain is produced inside the spiritual toe in our brain representing the physical damage to the real toe detected by neural pain sensors. The spiritual toe, since it exists in our brain, is not removed when a toe is amputated, hence people’s ability to experience such things as phantom limbs and phantom limb pain after they have been amputated. Basic sense representations, higher-level cognitive ideas, emotions, and everything that exists in our consciousness as knowledge is spiritual. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

776 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 776-778 Smith, S. P. Review of B. Alan Wallace & Brian Hodel's Book: Embracing Mind: The Common Ground of Science and Spirituality Book Review Review of B. Alan Wallace & Brian Hodel's Book: Embracing Mind: The Common Ground of Science and Spirituality Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT Wallace (and Hodel) do a very good job in "Embracing Mind." They break the book down into three parts. In Part One, Wallace takes another look at science, and where science may drift off into scientism. In Part Two, Wallace looks at a more promising science that can study the mind. In Part Three, Wallace takes up "tools and technologies of a Buddhist science of contemplation. You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Embracing-Mind-Common-ScienceSpirituality/dp/1590304829/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: science, spirituality, mind, common ground, scientism, buddhist. In Part One, Wallace takes another look at science, and where science may drift off into scientism. Wallace (page 22) tells us where scientific materialism carries hidden metaphysical assumptions - " what did that interpretation boil down to? The five principles examined previously: objectivism, metaphysical realism, the closure principle, universalism, and physical reductionism." Without going into detail what the principles entail, I will merely summerize what Wallace (page 23) concludes: "So strong was their enthusiasm for an all-embracing scientific worldview that they often allowed their hopes, dreams, and beliefs to masquerade as facts. They were especially impressed with Darwin's theory of natural selection. According to their own interpretation, natural selection meant that organisms best suited to win the competition for scare resources survived, passing on their advantageous traits to succeeding generations." Wallace (page 24) writes: "Social philosophers influenced by scientific materialism created social Darwinism, the view that nations and individuals competed for economic supremacy in an arena where only the `favored races' or toughest individuals would succeed. There was no room here for any softness or idealism and, of course, such a philosophy gave at least tacit approval to war, imperialism, and racism. In like manner, Karl Marx reduced all aspects of culture to economics." Writing on modernity, with its scientific progress, Wallace (page 25) writes: "We have been exposed to this philosophy throughout our lives - in the classroom, in the media, by our doctors, and through the decisions of government agencies ruling on health, the environment, and elsewhere. It has been pounded into us consistently for so long that we've come to accept it as common sense. This, we are told, is what `non-believers' accept as truth." Wallace (page 75) writes on the study of mind and brain: "It wasn't until the late nineteenth century that science attempted a formal study of the mind. Given the enormous influence of scientific materialism, it is not surprising that a physical approach - the study of behavior and the brain, the `gray matter' - held sway. By the early twentieth century, nonmaterial qualities attributed to the mind (thoughts, feelings, images, dreams, and so on) were neatly avoided by correlating them to the Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 777 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 776-778 Smith, S. P. Review of B. Alan Wallace & Brian Hodel's Book: Embracing Mind: The Common Ground of Science and Spirituality physical brain, with its internal physiology, and to physical behavior. This, mind was simply redefined as the brain." Wallace (page 82) writes: "By relying on the argument of mere correlations between mental phenomena and brain physiology, cognitive psychologists remind us of astrologers, who rely on correlates between patterns in the heavens and events on earth, rather than astronomers, who have actually explored the skies scientifically with telescopes." Wallace (page 83) writes: "Shouldn't cognitive scientists first be experts on their own consciousness, deeply exploring their subjective nature, before they tackle the complexities of the mind-brain connection? Given the rigors of science, wouldn't such self-knowledge be useful for scientists in general? After all, the scientific mind behind the eyepiece of a physical instrument (and behind the devising of theories) is the fundamental instrument of all science. Must not this ultimate black box be opened and carefully examined if science wants to be certain that its theories and data are something more than complex imaginings or projections?" Wallace (page 84) concludes: "The preceding discussion should make it clear that science's attitude toward the mind has been hampered by historical baggage. According to the dictates of its Christian background, science explored outer, objective phenomena and avoided the inner, subjective realm. Lack of self knowledge hampered scientists by blinding them to subjective distortions that have prejudiced the scientific enterprise." Wallace (page 102-103) writes: "What of those students who do take an interest in science, believing that the practice of science follows the open-minded, exploratory spirit of the scientific method? They study textbooks that either imply or boldly declare that as-yet-unproven theories are definitely true or will certainly be proven true in the future. They are exposed to an attitude toward science that promotes conformity to the foregone conclusions of scientific materialism even as it pretends to favor free inquiry. Those people who see the contradiction are left with the choice of buckling under or striking out on their own. Alternatively, they may become discouraged with science altogether and choose another career." Wallace (page 105) writes: "The materialist approach to medicine has led to the desire for a `quick fix' - just pop a pill and let chemicals take care of it. Drug, tobacco, and alcohol addiction follow the same logic. There may be more to mental and physical illness than just chemicals, but the physical bias of scientific materialism has largely marginalized alternative therapies that show promise." In Part Two, Wallace looks at a more promising science that can study the mind. Wallace (page 142143) writes: "Through intense and lengthy practice, the attention can be honed into a precision tool that, figuratively speaking, lights up the mind's interior. First one undergoes a sustained, rigorous training in developing stability and vividness of attention. One then uses one's enhanced powers of mental perception to learn to distinguish between the phenomena that are presented to the senses (including the sixth sense of mental perception) and the conceptual superimpositions that one under normal circumstances compulsively projects upon those phenomena." Wallace (page 144) writes: "A guilty conscience is no more conductive to contemplative practice than nervous agitation or drowsiness." Wallace (page 155) writes: "The Middle Way proposes an alternative explanation for the appearance of phenomena of the universe - regularities. Certain things tend to occur together or in a sequence. Whereas causes imply to us some power to affect, the Middle Way defines appearances as mere regularities." ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 778 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 776-778 Smith, S. P. Review of B. Alan Wallace & Brian Hodel's Book: Embracing Mind: The Common Ground of Science and Spirituality Wallace (page 156) writes: "If we conceive of one stage as an absolute, permanent, independent entity, by definition it cannot have any relationship to anything else. By definition, two completely self-contained, independent, permanent, absolute things cannot affect one other. If they did, they wouldn't be self-contained, independent, and so on. But if we back off that position and say that there is simply a `relationship' between them, Middle Way philosophers will point out that we are now viewing these things (such as seed and sprout) as relative, conventional realities. A relationship composed of regularities doesn't require absolute realities or absolute causality, and the relationship itself lacks any such inherent existence independent of the things that are related. Seed and sprout and their causal relationship, though existing conventionally, are now seen as `empty of' absolute existence." In Part Three, Wallace takes up "tools and technologies of a Buddhist science of contemplation." Wallace (page 213) writes: "From a Buddhist standpoint our mental afflictions, or distortions, stand in the way of enlightenment. From an empirical or scientific standpoint, such biases impede the search for truth, especially since the mind is truly the primary scientific instrument. Whether we are trying to use the mind and scientific instruments to probe stars and galaxies or we wish to understand the nature and workings of the mind itself, our mental projections and illusions of knowledge cloud the picture." References B. Alan Wallace & Brian Hodel, 2008, Embracing Mind: The Common Ground of Science and Spirituality, Shambhala. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

415 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience Article The Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience Steven E. Kaufman* ABSTRACT We have demonstrated how seemingly separate experiential realities can come to exist within the context of an ultimately indivisible, singular existence, but not why there exists an awareness of experience itself. That is, although we have demonstrated how existence can impactively interact with itself to create the form of any experience, we have yet to explain why there exists an awareness of that experiential form—in other words, why the differentiated area of reality that exists as the experiencer is aware of the form of its impactive-interactive relationship with the surrounding reality. In the following sections, we will explain why an awareness of the experiential boundary exists. In understanding why awareness exists, the nature of consciousness will become apparent. Consciousness is unlimited, borderless, and undefined, whereas awareness is limited, bordered, and defined. When awareness becomes caught up in experiential reality, mistaking experiential reality for an independently existent reality, it literally becomes un-consciousness, or the opposite of consciousness. Since, for awareness, reality is whatever it experiences it to be, although awareness always remains what it is (i.e., consciousness), what awareness can experience itself to be is another matter entirely. For this reason, awareness can become unaware, can become unconscious of what it is, can become experientially cut off or separated from the consciousness that lies both within and beyond the screen of experience. Key Words: experience, awareness, consciousness, integration, unified model of reality, relational-matrix model. Section 1 The Nature of Awareness 1.1 Awareness as intrinsic to physical reality As we have shown, there exists nothing we can call a physical reality in the absence of an experience of that reality. We can also state that there exists nothing we can call an experience in the absence of an awareness of that experience. The last statement is self-evident, for I would challenge anyone to name or describe an experience of which they‘re unaware. Correspondence: Steven E. Kaufman, http://www.unifiedreality.com E-mail: skaufman@unifiedreality.com Note: This work was completed in 2001 and is based on my book “Unified Reality Theory: The Evolution of Existence into Experience (ISBN-10: 0970655010)” published in the same year. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 416 Therefore, since there exists no physical reality in the absence of experience, and no experience in the absence of awareness, we can state that there exists no physical reality in the absence of an awareness of that physical reality. Therefore, awareness is intrinsic to the existence of what we experience as physical reality. Furthermore, physical reality, as we experience it to exist—which is the only way it does exist—can‘t itself be the source or cause of awareness, because the experiential existence of physical reality is dependent upon a coexistent awareness. It‘s commonly thought and assumed that the brain or central nervous system in some way produces what we call awareness and, mistakenly, also call consciousness. However, the brain is a physical experiential reality, and as a defined reality, it exists as such only within the context of experience, just as experience exists as such only within the context of a coexistent awareness. That is, the brain can‘t exist as we experience it to exist—i.e., as brain, as a defined physical reality—without at least a coexistent awareness that can experience it as such. How, then, can the brain, as we experience it to exist as a physical reality, be the source of its own objective existence? It can‘t. The brain, as an experiential reality, can‘t be the source of the awareness necessary for its own experiential existence. The notion that the brain is some type of machine or machination which, in some unknown way, churns out the product consciousness-awareness has no basis within the context of an understanding of physical reality as a relative or experiential reality. How can a machinelike brain produce consciousness and awareness when its supposed product is intrinsic to the existence of the machine itself? It can‘t. We can‘t construct a machine to produce something when the machine itself first needs its own product in order to exist as a machine. Let‘s say we‘ve found some type of mechanism, and wherever we see that mechanism, there exists in its vicinity a certain alloy. The only place we see this alloy is near this mechanism. We then come to the conclusion that this mechanism must be the producer of this alloy and that this alloy is produced only by this machine. But what happens to that theory when we find out, as we study the mechanism, that the alloy itself is intrinsic to the mechanism? We can pretend that it doesn‘t matter, and go on insisting that the mechanism is the producer of the alloy; or we can come to the inevitable conclusion that the alloy must come from somewhere besides the mechanism, since there must have already been some alloy in existence before the mechanism‘s construction, since the alloy is part of the mechanism itself. In our experience, awareness is associated with brain function. This observation has led us to the assumption that the brain is in some way the producer of awareness. However, as we have just demonstrated, awareness is intrinsic to physical reality, and so awareness is itself necessary for the brain to exist as we experience it to exist, which is as some type of machine or machination. At this point, either we can go on insisting on the validity of our assumption that the brain, as a physical reality, produces awareness, or we can look for a source of awareness that lies beyond what we experience as brain. By now, you probably know which way we‘ll go. Since we can‘t look to physical reality as the source of awareness, we must look elsewhere. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 417 1.2 The localization of existence into awareness If the brain isn‘t the actual source of awareness, then where does awareness come from? As we will show, awareness doesn‘t come ―from‖ anywhere; rather, awareness is what exists relatively somewhere when what exists absolutely everywhere becomes localized to a particular somewhere by existing in relation to itself. In order for there to be experience, differentiated existence must impact itself, forming an experiencer/experienced duality. The formation of the experiencer/experienced duality defines a relative somewhere within what exists absolutely everywhere. It‘s this localization of existence to a relative somewhere that makes what exists literally a-where—i.e., aware. The modifier ―ness‖ denotes ―a condition, quality, or state of being.‖ So, awareness is the state of being aware—i.e., the state of being relatively somewhere, rather than being absolutely everywhere or nowhere,1 as depicted in figure 75. somewhere somewhere everywhere Figure 75 When what exists everywhere comes to exist in relation to itself, what is created are relative somewheres. To understand how what exists everywhere can exist in relation to itself to form awareness, let‘s use the following example. Let‘s say that our existence fills a room. That existence filling the room we will call our everywhere existence. Now, let‘s drop a curtain in the middle of that room. Our existence still fills the entire room, but now our existence also has another level of existence. There‘s still our existence everywhere, but now there‘s also existence on one side of the curtain and existence on the other side of the curtain—i.e., there‘s now a relational level of existence existing within the context of our everywhere existence. These existences on either side of the curtain are only relative. Neither exists as such except in relation to the other; what exists on one side of the curtain exists as such only in relation to the complementary existence on the other side of the curtain. These two relative existences are thus inseparable, one not existing without the other. These two relative existences are analogous to the experiencer/experienced duality. 1 Everywhere and nowhere are conceptually equivalent. Everywhere isn’t somewhere, for somewhere is a specific place within everywhere and implies the coexistence of somewhere else. Therefore, if everywhere isn’t somewhere, we can say that what doesn’t exist somewhere is nowhere, which is the same as everywhere. Nowhere shouldn’t be confused with nonexistence or no-existence; nowhere simply means that there’s no localization of existence to any relative somewhere, i.e., either here or there. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 418 There are now two levels of existence that exist simultaneously. There‘s the absolute level of existence, which is the everywhere existence that fills the room. This existence is absolute because its existence isn‘t dependent upon any other existence; it is what it is. There‘s also a relational level of existence, consisting of the complementary somewhere/somewhere-else existences on either side of the curtain. The relational level of existence can be said to extend from or exist within the absolute level of existence. The relational level of existence isn‘t other than the absolute level of existence, and each relational pole of that relational level of existence (i.e., somewhere and somewhere else) isn‘t other than absolute existence. Yet, as they exist, as relative realities, as somewhere and somewhere else, those relational poles are conditional and constrained because, as relative realities, the existence of each relational pole depends on the existence of the other, complementary pole. The existence that fills the room is existence every-where. The relative existences on either side of the curtain-boundary are each existence some-where. Existence that‘s everywhere we can call every-where-ness, i.e., the state of being everywhere. Existence that‘s localized to a relative somewhere we can call some-where-ness, i.e., the state of being somewhere. Existence that‘s somewhere is existence that‘s a-where, or existing in a state of awareness. 1.3 The coexistence of awareness and experience In order for existence everywhere to become existence somewhere and existence somewhere else, a boundary or dividing line needs to be imposed within existence everywhere, creating the relative existences somewhere and somewhere else. Existence that‘s relatively somewhere thus has something extra, something additional, that isn‘t present in existence everywhere. That ―something extra‖ intrinsic to the relative existence of some-where-ness (i.e., awareness) is the boundary that defines it as relative existence. Thus, existence that‘s relatively somewhere consists of existence on one side of the boundary, and the boundary itself that differentiates existence somewhere from existence somewhere else. The boundary is what defines that existence somewhere, for the boundary is what defines somewhere in relation to somewhere else. The boundary that defines the somewhereness (i.e., awareness) is what we have described as the experiential boundary, and this boundary is also, then, what the awareness defined by that boundary experiences as reality. The boundary that defines existence somewhere is intrinsic to that existence somewhere, and so it‘s inseparable from that existence somewhere. Each existence somewhere thus consists of a defined area of existence and the boundary which defines that area as somewhere, i.e., as awhere or aware. There‘s no somewhere without a somewhere else, and there‘s neither somewhere nor somewhere else without a boundary that defines their relationship. A room consists of the a defined area of space and the walls which define that area. Likewise, relative ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 419 existence, at the level where differentiated existence impacts itself, consists of a defined area of existence (awareness) and the boundary which defines that area (experience). Absolute existence everywhere doesn‘t need a boundary to exist; it exists independent of any boundary. However, the relative existences somewhere and somewhere else depend on a boundary for their existence as relative realities. Thus, there‘s no existence somewhere, no somewhereness, without experience, and there‘s no experience without absolute existence becoming localized to a relative somewhere, i.e., into a state of awareness. Each relative existence, then, has two complementary aspects. One aspect is the existence somewhere, which we can call the relative-existence content, or the whereness content. The other aspect is the boundary which defines that existence somewhere, which we can call the relativeexistence construct, or the whereness construct. The whereness content is equivalent to awareness; the whereness construct is equivalent to the experience itself, i.e., the experiential reality or object, as depicted in figure 76. content (awareness) somewhere somewhere everywhere construct (experience) Figure 76 When existence everywhere becomes defined in relation to itself, what exists at that relational level of existence are two somewheres, as well as the boundary that defines those somewheres in relation to each other. Thus, each somewhere consists of the differentiated area of existence where it is (whereness content), and the boundary that defines it as being there (whereness construct). The content of each somewhere is awareness, and the boundary or construct that defines each somewhere is experience, i.e., the experiential reality. What exists directly where we are at each moment? Our awareness, the content of our relational being. What surrounds that awareness? Experience, the construct that defines our awareness. Awareness and experience are dual aspects of relational being, the complementary aspects of existence that‘s existing in relation to itself by having become defined in relation to itself. So, why does an awareness of experience exist? Because where differentiated existence impacts itself and thereby becomes defined in relation to itself, existence is existing somewhere in relation to somewhere else, and there also exists a construct which defines that relationship and thus is inseparable from that existence somewhere. In other words, whenever existence ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 420 everywhere is localized into existence somewhere, i.e., into a state of awareness, there must coexist with that awareness a boundary which defines the awareness as such, and that boundary is what existence somewhere, defined as awareness, is aware of as its experience of reality. We can‘t become defined as existence somewhere without a boundary which defines that somewhere, and while our existence is defined as being there, that boundary is then inseparable from our being there—in other words, inseparable from our awareness. For this reason, wherever there‘s awareness, there‘s experience; and wherever there‘s experience, there‘s awareness. So, an awareness of experience exists because awareness and experience are two sides of the same coin, two aspects of the same relative existence, as depicted in figure 77. everywhere (undefined differentiated unexperienced reality) somewhere somewhere impactive interaction whereness content (awareness) whereness construct (experience) something (sum-thing) Figure 77 Where existence becomes defined in relation to itself through an impactive interaction, existence is being somewhere, and that existence somewhere is awareness. Furthermore, the boundary which defines that awareness is experience. That boundary we will also call the whereness construct, because the form of that boundary is the way awareness is structured. Undefined unexperienced differentiated existence is what it is. Existence that has become defined in relation to itself is what it is (awareness), and it‘s also the boundary that defines its relationship with itself (experience). Before we go on to discuss the source of the experiencer/experienced duality, we will first discuss the role played by what we experience as brain in the formation of our particular experiencer/experienced duality. 1.4 The function of the defined physical reality we experience as brain The basis of the localization of existence into awareness and the simultaneous creation of experience is the differentiation of existence, which allows existence to impactively interact with itself, thereby forming a somewhere/somewhere-else duality. The experiencer/experienced duality is simply the somewhere/somewhere-else duality where one existence somewhere has become defined as here (i.e., as the experiencer) and the other existence somewhere has become defined as there (i.e., as the experienced reality). Actually, no existence somewhere is separable from existence anywhere else. However, as differentiated existence impacts itself, impactive boundaries come to exist, as when the finger touches the nose. Within the context of the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 421 impactive-interactive relationship, differentiated existence becomes defined in relation to itself. The impactive boundary exists as experience, and one of the existences somewhere which is defined by that boundary exists as awareness. What exists where we experience our bodies to be are primary distortion processes that are interacting to form compound distortion processes, which themselves are interacting to form higher order and more differentiated compound processes, none of which is actually separable from the rest of existence. As the differentiated area of reality that exists where our bodies are is impacted by the surrounding reality, those impactive interactions define an experiential relationship between what exists where are bodies are and what exists around our bodies. Within the context of those impactive interactions, and only within that context, what we experience as our bodies then becomes defined as somewhere in relation to the surrounding reality as somewhere else; and in becoming so defined, existence where our bodies are exists in relation to the surrounding reality as an experiencer/experienced duality. The brain is a differentiated area of reality that has evolved to be impacted by, and to respond to impacts by, certain other types of differentiated existence. Here, we‘re concerned only with the ability of the differentiated area of reality we experience as brain to be impacted by the surrounding reality and so become defined in relation to that surrounding reality. How the brain responds to those impacts—i.e., how it responds to external stimuli—isn‘t currently relevant. The function of the differentiated area of reality that we experience as brain is to act as a highly reactive and selective impactive-interactive interface. By acting as the means by which differentiated existence impacts itself and thus becomes defined in relation to itself, the differentiated area of reality we experience as brain allows the creation of a somewhere/somewhere-else duality and, thus, an experiencer/experienced duality. Organic physical sensors are selectively impacted by a certain type of differentiated existence, e.g., the photoreceptor cells in the retina of the eye are stimulated by primary distortion processes (i.e., what we experience as light).* This impact then results in the sensory nerve associated with those cells—i.e., the optic nerve—being stimulated and thereby sending a signal and impacting certain areas of the brain, e.g., the visual cortex. In this way, the brain receives stimuli or impacts from all over the body by way of the different organic physical sensors and associated sensory nerves. While the organic physical sensors are the first to be impacted by the surrounding reality, the brain is the central area where all of these different impacts converge. The organic physical sensors and associated sensory nerves are merely the means by which the differentiated area of reality we experience as brain is impacted by the surrounding reality. The brain is, for us, the primary means by which our existence becomes localized into awareness as an experiencer/experienced duality, because where the brain is experienced to be is the differentiated area of reality that‘s ultimately impacted by the surrounding reality. * It should be kept in mind that the defined experiential reality we call light doesn’t exist as such until it’s experienced as a physical reality. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 422 If a sensory nerve is cut, the brain doesn‘t receive a signal through the sensory nerve from an impact upon the organic physical sensor, and so there‘s then no awareness of the impact as a physical reality. For instance, if the optic nerve is cut, or isn‘t working for any reason, light can still impact the photoreceptor cells in the retina of the eye, but those impacts don‘t then become an awareness of the physical experience of light or color. Conversely, during brain surgery, vivid experiences of light and color can be created by direct stimulation of the visual cortex. These examples provide evidence that the impacts upon the differentiated area of reality we experience as brain are what define existence where we are as an experiencer/experienced duality. However, the foregoing discussion of the brain as the means by which existence impacts itself, becomes defined in relation to itself, and so becomes localized into awareness as an experiencer/experienced duality, shouldn‘t be construed as a statement that the brain is itself the source of that awareness. The brain isn‘t the ultimate source of awareness any more than a faucet is the ultimate source of water. The brain functions to localize what exists everywhere to a certain somewhere, just as the faucet functions to deliver water, which exists everywhere, to a certain somewhere. If you‘d never been out of your house, and never looked out a window when it was raining, you‘d know of water only in relation to the faucet. In such a case, it might seem as if faucets were the cause and source of the existence of water, when in reality the faucet is only a means or mechanism for the delivery of water. In the same way, our awareness or experience of reality exists in relation to brain function, and so we have assumed that the brain is the cause and source of awareness, when in actuality the brain is simply a means or mechanism by which what exists everywhere becomes localized to a particular somewhere. Although the two are related, the means or mechanism of delivery shouldn‘t be mistaken for the ultimate source of what‘s being delivered. The existence of awareness itself is a function of relational matrix (whereness) content, which is ultimately the same everywhere, since all relational matrix content consists of the same existence existing in relation to itself. What any awareness experiences is a function of the whereness construct which defines that awareness. So, while all relative existence can be awareness and all awareness has the same ultimate source, all awareness doesn‘t have the same experience, since ultimately inseparable and undefined whereness content coexists with different defining whereness constructs. The type and size of the brain are related to states of awareness, or the quality of awareness as a function of what an awareness experiences as reality, but the brain isn‘t responsible for the existence of awareness itself. The source of awareness is absolute existence, or reality as it is. The bigger the faucet, forming a larger conduit, the more water that can come out; and the bigger the brain, forming a larger impactive interface, the more numerous and varied can the impactive interactions be, and so the more defined will be the awareness which exists in the differentiated area of reality so defined by those impactive interactions. The brain is fundamentally an impactive interface, and the evolution of the brain represents an expansion of that impactive interface. As the impactive interface has expanded, the ability of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 423 differentiated existence to impactively interact with itself has increased, resulting a wider range of experiences (and responses) and a correspondingly more defined awareness. Any differentiated area of reality can be aware if that area is capable of being impacted by other differentiated areas of reality. The brain is simply a differentiated area of reality that has evolved to perform this function particularly well. It doesn‘t take a brain to be aware, but, having a brain or central nervous system certainly must create a different experiencer/experienced duality and, thus, a different state of awareness, from what would exist in some other differentiated area of reality that wasn‘t as receptive to being impacted. A brain and a rock are both compound processes, and both are inseparable parts of existence. Ultimately, the whereness content of the area where the brain exists and the whereness content of the area where the rock exists aren‘t different, for any differentiated area of reality is always the same existence existing in relation to itself. However, each area has a different pattern of organization. These different patterns of organization create different impactive-interactive abilities for each compound process. The differentiated area of reality that exists where we experience a rock to be would have a rock awareness, dictated by whatever impactive interactions define that differentiated area of reality as somewhere in relation to somewhere-else. Our awareness is probably much more defined, and our experiences probably much more numerous, because the differentiated area of reality we experience as brain would seem to be more impactable, more reactive, than the area we call a rock. Although it may seem quite strange to many readers to discuss the awareness of a rock, the fact is that there‘s no basis for assuming that any differentiated area of reality is unaware. We exist, and we‘re aware. So, why do we assume that other aspects of existence are unaware? Because we can‘t carry on a conversation with those existences? Because they can‘t say to us, in our language, ―I‘m aware‖? Conversely, we could argue that we have no reason to assume that any differentiated area of reality is aware. However, the preceding arguments regarding the nature of awareness refute that position and, instead, point to the conclusion that awareness and experience are attributes of the relative localization of existence, as existence comes to exist in relation to itself, regardless of the means of that localization. The source of awareness is existence itself, which is everywhere. All it takes to be aware of experience is for existence to become defined in relation to itself through impactive interactions. What is a rock aware of? What does a rock experience? Who knows? I certainly don‘t, because I‘m not a rock! However, what I do know is that if the differentiated area of reality which exists where I am is aware of experience, then there‘s no reason not to think that differentiated areas of reality elsewhere are also aware of experience, since outside the divisive context of experience, there‘s no real separation, and very little real difference, between what exists here, as my awareness, and what ―I‖ experience to exist over there, as ―it.‖ So, although the brain may contribute to our particular state of awareness and be responsible for what we are aware of as our particular experiences of reality, the brain isn‘t the source of our awareness, for the source of awareness lies in existence itself. That having been said, let‘s now turn our attention and discussion to the ultimate source of awareness and experience. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 424 Section 2 Consciousness as Absolute Existence In the preceding section, we described awareness as a relative localization of existence. On the basis of that description, we can say that awareness doesn‘t actually come ―from‖ anywhere. Rather, awareness is simply existence coming to exist in relation to itself and, thus, being relatively somewhere rather than being absolutely everywhere. If awareness is existence being relatively somewhere, then what could we call existence being absolutely everywhere? Consciousness! Consciousness is what exists absolutely everywhere, and awareness is consciousness localized to a relative somewhere. So, we don‘t actually experience consciousness; what we experience is consciousness polarized or dualized into a relative state of awareness. Since any localized area of existence somewhere has the quality of a-where-ness, then nonlocalized existence everywhere would have the quality of every-where-ness or no-whereness. This unbordered everywhereness is consciousness. Thus, consciousness could also be called everywhereness, or nowhereness, i.e., existence being absolutely everywhere and, thus, nowhere. Within the context of the unified model of reality, consciousness is what exists absolutely.2 Satchit-ananda: Existence-consciousness-bliss.3 Consciousness is what it is and also what we are. We can‘t experience consciousness as such, because experience requires an experiencer/experienced duality. Therefore, being in the relative state of awareness necessary to be aware of any experience precludes our being, in that instant, in the nonrelative state of absolute consciousness. We mistakenly call our awareness our consciousness because our awareness is the child of consciousness, but awareness as such isn‘t consciousness. That is, although awareness is a relative extension of consciousness and has consciousness as its foundation, awareness is not absolute existence, but relative existence. Consciousness is unconstrained, undefined, borderless existence. Awareness is constrained, defined, bordered existence, which must coexist with the boundary which defines that existence, which boundary is experience itself. Thus, awareness of experience and consciousness actually are mutually exclusive states of being, since one involves an existent duality and the other exists in the absence of any duality. Awareness is a state of consciousness, but consciousness is more than awareness. Any attempt to define consciousness can be made only from a position of awareness, and so what‘s defined as consciousness can‘t be consciousness as it exists directly. 2 Furthermore, we should understand that “consciousness” (the word) isn’t what exists directly; rather “consciousness” is what we call what exists directly. “Consciousness” is a sign pointing to a reality that’s ultimately nameless and borderless. “Consciousness” is our way of conceptually packaging that which defies packaging. Thus, when we say that what exists is consciousness, what we’re really saying is that “consciousness” is what we call that which exists, which can’t be named, because naming is defining, and in defining it, it’s not that. 3 Sat-chit-ananda is translated as “existence-consciousness-bliss.” In ancient Hindu texts, this is considered the triple state of absolute being. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 425 Ultimately, we‘re not other than absolute existence, not other than consciousness itself. However, as we‘ve come to exist now, as differentiated areas of reality impactively interacting with the surrounding reality (from which we are ultimately inseparable), we exist in a relative state of awareness of experience. For this reason, our existence, which ultimately is borderless and unconfined consciousness, becomes, at this relational level of existence, bordered and confined awareness of experience. For those of us who would like to get beyond the duality and relativity of existence intrinsic to experience, the situation seems hopeless until we realize that we‘re inseparable from whatever it is that exists. Owing to this existential inseparability, we have direct access to whatever it is that exists by virtue of the inescapable fact that we are that. We can‘t go here or there to see it, or look at ourselves and see it; we can only be it. For as long as we‘re conceiving and perceiving what we are, we‘re precluded from directly being what we are. Consciousness is absolute existence, existence that‘s not confined or limited to a relative somewhere. Consciousness is existence that‘s not experiencing itself but just being itself, being what it is. However, consciousness is also relative existence, existence that‘s confined or limited to a relative somewhere, experiencing itself as it exists in a relative state of awareness. As previously pointed out, the evolution of each new relational level of existence doesn‘t eliminate the level of existence from which that new level extends. Therefore, the relative existence of awareness doesn‘t preclude the continued absolute existence of consciousness. The experiencer/experienced duality is an overlay upon undivided consciousness-existence. Without the foundation of absolute existence, there can be no relative existence. Without the foundation of consciousness, there can be no awareness. Without the foundation of unexperienced reality, there can be no experiential reality. Without the foundation of universal being, there can exist no individual being.4 2.1 Before the beginning (of the universe) there was....... consciousness This work began with the proposition that absolute existence successively dualizes to form the relational matrix—i.e., the relational structure upon which, and out of which, differentiated existence extends and evolves. We said that absolute existence could be considered an existent nothingness, since it exists without the boundaries or dividing lines that define a thing. We described absolute existence as being nothing and nowhere, because it‘s everything and everywhere. Therefore, absolute existence is conceptually equivalent to consciousness, which we have also described as being everywhere and, thus, nowhere. 4 Although we tend to think of the word “individual” as implying an independently existent person, the word has as its roots the two words “indivisible” and “dual.” The word “individual” therefore denotes an indivisible duality, which is another way of saying a relational state of being. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 426 We described the evolution of existence as absolute existence existing repetitively and progressively in relation to itself, thereby becoming differentiated, and then, finally, interacting with itself as differentiated existence to create experiential reality and an awareness of experience. If the term ―consciousness‖ is substituted for ―absolute existence,‖ we can then say that consciousness evolves into the awareness of experience by existing repetitively and progressively in relation to itself. Awareness is simply what exists where we are, as a relative aspect of the consciousness that exists everywhere. Absolute existence is consciousness, and all relative reality is formed through consciousnessexistence coming to exist in relation to itself. We are that consciousness, we are that absolute existence coming to exist in relation to itself, impactively interacting with itself, and thus existing as consciousness in a relative state of awareness of experience. Thus, we‘re consciously aware beings, or, literally, consciousness existing (i.e., being) in a relative state of awareness. There‘s really nothing else other than the no-thing of consciousness. The universe of experiential some-things arises as the underlying unexperienced no-thing of consciousness exists in relation to itself. None of these experiential somethings has an independent existence, for all somethings actually are relationally existent extensions of the underlying no-thing of consciousness. Therefore, physical reality is a product of consciousness; consciousness isn‘t a product of physical reality. Physical reality doesn‘t interact with itself in some unknown fashion to cause consciousness to come into existence. Rather, consciousness, through a process of repetitive and progressive self-relation, becomes an awareness of experience and thus creates what we experience as physical reality. Section 3 Experiential Mechanics II What we experience we consider to be reality. As previously explained, all experience requires a coexistent awareness. We can be aware of three fundamental types of experience: physical, mental, and emotional. Our total experience of reality consists of these three intertwined experiential realities. So far we‘ve described the experiential process only in terms of physical experience. Using the experiential model developed to explain the existence of physical experience, in this section we will describe how consciousness, by existing in relation to itself as a differentiated relational matrix, also creates mental experience. Once we have described the nature of physical and mental experiences, we will examine the nature of emotional experience. We‘re aware of both physical and mental experiences in each moment. On the one hand, through our five physical senses, we‘re constantly experiencing the universe as composed of separate physical, observable, or in some way tangible or definable components. On the other hand, we also find ourselves perpetually experiencing the mental components of thought and concept. Our physical experiences seem to occur within the realm we call space, and our mental experiences seem to occur within the realm we call mind. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 427 Physical and mental experiences can incite emotional experiences, and emotional experiences can incite physical and mental experiences. All three types of experience are different, yet they are all related. In the discussion to follow, we will show how physical, mental, and emotional experiences all arise as extensions of consciousness existing in relation to itself. 3.1 The framework of experiential reality For experience to exist, differentiated existence must impactively interact with itself, thereby creating a somewhere/somewhere-else duality, as well as an impactive or experiential boundary defining each relative somewhere. Previously, the experiential relationship was depicted in figures 66 and 73 as two differentiated extensions of existence coming into contact. We will now modify the experiential relationship as depicted in those figures (and on the left in figure 78) to create a diagram that will assist us in understanding the nature of, and the relationships between, physical, mental, and emotional experiences. We, as differentiated areas of reality, are capable of being impacted by the surrounding reality. Since we can be impacted by existence from all sides, the cumulative effect of these impactive interactions is to define where we are as a focal somewhere in relation to a surrounding somewhere else, as depicted in figure 78. differentiated reality differentiated reality d i unexperienced reality f differentiated f reality y t e i r somewhere l e n a t e i a t e d r somewhere-else Figure 78 (Left) The basic experiential relationship that differentiated existence forms with itself to create the somewhere/somewhere-else duality. (Middle) A differentiated reality being impacted on all sides by other differentiated areas of reality. Each different experiential relationship is denoted by a small dashed circle. (Right) As these impactive interactions converge around a single differentiated area of reality, the multiple experiential relationships combine to form a single experiential construct, defining a focal somewhere in relation to a surrounding somewhere else. This relationship between a focal somewhere and a surrounding somewhere-else forms the framework that underlies what we experience as physical, mental, and emotional reality. How this experiential framework relates to consciousness, awareness, and the experiential construct is depicted in figure 79. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 428 whereness content (nowhere) (a-where) CONSCIOUSNESS (somewhere) AWARENESS (experiencer) (everywhere) experiential construct (experience) (somewhere-else) (everywhere-else) (experienced) Figure 79 The fundamental relationship that absolute existence as consciousness forms with itself to create what functions as our basic framework of experience. The entire relational matrix or whereness content is consciousness, but that whereness content is dualized into a focal somewhere and a surrounding somewhere or everywhere else. The somewhere/somewhere-else duality is analogous to experiencer/experienced duality. Consciousness localized to a focal somewhere functions as awareness. The experiential construct, which is the boundary or dividing line between somewhere and everywhere else, is what awareness experiences as reality. Any focal somewhere exists in a relative state of being, where it is directly. That relative state of being has two aspects: what exists within the experiential boundary, and the experiential boundary itself. What exists within the experiential boundary is the whereness content, i.e., the awareness: the experiential boundary itself is the whereness or experiential construct, i.e., the experience. Whereness content isn‘t experienced; it‘s the experiencer, the direct being, existence where it is directly, the awareness. That direct being is consciousness, but it‘s consciousness existing in relation to itself. Consciousness existing in relation to itself always remains directly consciousness, for it can‘t be other than what it is. However, consciousness existing in relation to itself, while still being consciousness, is constrained or limited consciousness, limited by the boundary that defines it as awareness. In this way, consciousness becomes its own experiential object through its existence as awareness of the experiential construct. The focal somewhere—i.e., the awareness—is aware of experience, of the experiential construct, because the experiential construct is inseparable from awareness‘ relative existence. What exists absolutely can‘t be other than what it is. So, while consciousness exists relatively somewhere, part of that existence somewhere is the boundary which defines that somewhere. Thus, if consciousness is going to exist relatively somewhere rather than absolutely everywhere, part of that existence somewhere is awareness, and another part of that existence somewhere is the boundary which defines that somewhere. Thus, wherever there exists awareness, there also exists experience. We say that we‘re aware of experience, as if there were a linear relationship between ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 429 our awareness and our experience, but this isn‘t actually the case. Rather, awareness and experience are the mutually coexistent aspects of consciousness existing in relation to itself. Having developed an experiential framework, we will now focus our discussion upon the experiential construct and how it comes to exist as our awareness of physical and mental experiences. 3.2 The experiential construct The experiential construct has been referred to variously as the whereness construct, the experiential boundary, and the impactive boundary.5 All of these terms refer to the boundary or dividing line that‘s created when differentiated existence impacts itself and becomes defined in relation to itself, thereby creating the somewhere/somewhere-else or experiencer/experienced duality. No matter what we call this boundary, what‘s important to understand is that the shape or form of this boundary is what we‘re aware of as experience. Since we‘re aware of three fundamental types of experience (i.e., physical, mental, and emotional), these different types of experience must all represent an awareness of some form of the experiential construct which defines that awareness. In the following sections, we will distinguish between these three fundamentally different types of experience. All three types of experience represent an awareness of an experiential construct, which is what makes them all experiential realities. However, because all three types of experience also are fundamentally different experiential realities, each must represent an awareness of an experiential construct that‘s in some fundamental way different from the other experiential constructs. Therefore, in order to explain the basis of physical, mental, and emotional experiences, we must describe those differences, so that each particular type of experience can be related to a different experiential construct. First, we will discuss physical and mental experiences and their associated experiential constructs. In the case of physical and mental experiences, there seem to be two functioning experiential constructs responsible for creating the difference between physical and mental experiences. However, before we can relate physical and mental experiences to an awareness of these experiential constructs, we must first explain the difference between, as well as the reason for the existence of, these two experiential constructs. 3.21 Two experiential constructs, external and internal 5 Our ability to think about things is to a great degree limited by the names we attach to those things. To avoid this limitation as much as possible, we have had to assign multiple names to what is here referred to as the experiential construct. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 430 The differentiation of existence allows existence to impact itself and thus to become defined in relation to itself. Awareness is a differentiated area of consciousness-existence that has become defined as a focal somewhere in relation to a surrounding somewhere or everywhere else. Awareness is defined and bounded externally by an experiential construct, as we‘ve already discussed. However, this awareness, once defined externally, can also be defined internally if another impactive interface exists within this differentiated structure, allowing for an internal level of impactive interaction and, thereby, the creation of another experiential construct situated internal to the first. In this way, an awareness can become sandwiched between external and internal experiential constructs, as depicted in figure 80. external experiential construct somewhere-else awareness (somewhere) (experiencer) internal experiential construct (experienced) Figure 80 Awareness defined by external and internal experiential constructs. In this situation, consciousness is localized to a relative somewhere, i.e., into awareness, by both external and internal boundaries. Thus, intrinsic to the existence of this relative somewhere would be an awareness of experiences derived from both the external and internal experiential constructs. 3.211 Relating the experiential constructs to brain structure Before we discuss the experiential implications of this sandwiching of awareness, we must first explain the basis for the existence of external and internal experiential constructs. Throughout this work, we have related structure to function. In Articles 2 and 3 of this work, we related the structure of reality to the way physical reality is observed to function. Here, we will relate the structure of the brain to the existence and functioning of external and internal experiential constructs. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 431 In terms of the relational-matrix model, what we experience as the brain6 is a compound process, a stable association of distortion processes, that‘s capable of being impacted by certain stimuli while retaining its overall organizational integrity. This ability of the differentiated area of reality we experience as brain to undergo continuous fluctuations in process interaction at one level, while retaining its overall structure, is what gives the differentiated area of reality experienced as brain the ability to form an ongoing impactive-interactive relationship with the surrounding reality. This ongoing impactive-interactive relationship exists as an experiencer/experienced duality, which persists as long as the differentiated relational structure we experience as brain continues to function as an impactive interface, i.e., until we die. Although the brain isn‘t the ultimate source of awareness, because awareness is just the relative localization of what already exists as consciousness, what we experience as the brain is, in our case, the impactive interface that provides for the ongoing localization of our awareness and the simultaneous creation of what we experience as reality. In other words, what we experience as the brain is the differentiated relational structure that, in our case, allows existence to become defined in relation to itself and thereby to experience itself. What exists where we experience the brain to be is, then, in our case, the means or mechanism by which consciousness becomes localized into awareness. The overall structural continuity of the brain creates a corresponding continuity of awareness, while the variable aspects of brain structure—i.e., the different ways it can be stimulated— provide that awareness with a variable experiential boundary, which exists as variable experiences of reality. Again, just as the faucet brings water to the house, so the brain localizes consciousness into a particular awareness. Just as the faucet isn‘t the ultimate source of water, so the brain isn‘t the ultimate source of awareness or consciousness. Both the faucet and the brain are means or mechanisms for the localization of a ubiquitous existence. On Earth, water is everywhere, and faucets bring that water to a particular somewhere. In the Universe, consciousness-existence is everywhere, and the differentiated area of reality we experience as brain serves to localize that consciousness into a particular awareness. Therefore, the perceived structure and function of the brain should somehow be related to any experiential construct.7 In terms of physical reality, the brain consists primarily of a certain organization of cells called neurons. Neurons consist of a cell body, many dendrites, and generally a single axon. Neurons communicate with each other through their axonal and dendritic extensions, as depicted in figure 81. 6 We say “what we experience as the brain” to point out that the brain is only what we experience to exist in that differentiated area of reality. What exists there directly isn’t a defined physical reality. Although this usage is more cumbersome, it points out that the brain as a defined reality doesn’t exist as such in the absence of experience. 7 Here, we are relating a physical structure to an experiential function. Although physical reality isn’t what’s there directly, a relationship exists between what’s there directly and what’s physically experienced; therefore, physical structure can be related to an experiential function. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 432 dendrites output input axon cell body Figure 81 Three neurons, each composed of a cell body, many dendrites, and a single axon. The arrows near the neuron on the left show the direction of propagation of a nervous impulse. The human brain contains approximately 10 billion of these neurons, organized and interconnected through their axonal and dendritic extensions. Through these axon-to-dendrite connections, neurons stimulate nervous impulses, as well as inhibit the stimulation of nervous impulses, in each other. These neuronal communications aren‘t always constant. Axon-to-dendrite connections between some neurons can increase or decrease in activity, depending on the degree to which those connections are used. These changes in axon-to-dendrite connections alter the ability of the neurons to communicate with and thus stimulate each other, and so allow for some variability in the pathways nervous impulses take as they propagate through the brain. Neurons are essentially highly reactive, i.e., impactable, cells that are capable of generating and transmitting electrochemical impulses to other cells. If the proper amount of stimulation is received by the dendrites of one neuron, an action potential can be generated, resulting in an electrochemical nervous impulse being transmitted along the axon to the dendrites of other neurons, which may or may not themselves be caused to generate their own action potentials as a result of this stimulation. Stimulation of the brain means the creation of patterns of neuronal stimulation within the overall brain structure. These patterns of neuronal stimulation are temporary fluctuations within the brain structure that represent alterations of both the external and internal experiential constructs. In other words, the patterns of neuronal stimulation occurring within what we experience as the brain represent the impactive interactions that define our existence as awareness. These patterns of neuronal stimulation then function as the two experiential constructs, defining the surrounding reality in relation to us, and also determining the form of the experiences we‘re aware of. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 433 Since the two experiential constructs are related to patterns of neuronal stimulation, the different experiential constructs—i.e., external and internal—must somehow represent different levels of neuronal organization. These two different levels of neuronal organization then result in two fundamentally different sets of neural pathways and, thereby, two different experiential constructs within the impactive interface that‘s the brain. In the next section, we will describe these two different levels of neuronal organization and, within that context, show how they correspond to the external and internal experiential constructs. Then, we will explain how the external and internal experiential constructs form the basis of physical and mental experiences, respectively. 3.212 Two levels of neuronal organization, invariant and variable For our purposes, we will consider neuronal organization as an attribute of how the neurons in the brain are interconnected through their communicating extensions, i.e., through their axons and dendrites. These neuronal communications determine the overall structural continuity of the brain in terms of neural pathways and patterns of neuronal stimulation. For this reason, discussing two different levels of neuronal organization means discussing two different types of neuronal connections. The patterns of neuronal stimulation within the brain are determined by which area(s) of the brain is (are) impacted (i.e., stimulated), as well as by the relationships within the brain of the neurons to one another through their axon-to-dendrite connections. The area(s) of the brain that is (are) stimulated or impacted is (are) determined by which sensory peripheral nerves are stimulated, and by the consistent connections of these nerves to certain areas of the brain. The relationships within the brain of the neurons to one another are a combination of invariant, or unchanging, structural relationships or connections, and variable, or changing structural relationships or connections. The brain receives stimuli from both outside and inside the body through the sensory nerves. The connections of the sensory nerves to the brain are relatively unchanging. These connections are essentially hardwired into the physical structure of the nervous system, providing for a consistent pattern of neuronal stimulation and, thus, a consistency of physical experience. For instance, primary distortion processes impact photoreceptor cells in the retina of the eye, stimulating the optic nerve, which then sends a nervous impulse to a certain group of cells in the visual cortex of the brain, creating a certain pattern of neuronal stimulation within those cells, and thereby forming a visual experience of light. The connections between the photoreceptor cells, the optic nerve, and the neurons of the visual cortex are relatively unchanging under normal conditions. These unchanging neuronal communications are an invariant aspect of brain structure, representing one level of neuronal organization and, thus, one type of experiential construct. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 434 Since this invariant aspect of brain structure is primarily impacted by the surrounding reality, we will relate this level of neuronal organization to the external experiential construct. However, the brain is more than just a reactive punching bag waiting to be pummeled by impacts from certain stimuli. As the brain is impacted by certain stimuli, creating physical experience, neuronal communications within the brain can change, through alterations of axon-to-dendrite connections, creating different associations of neurons and different neural pathways and patterns of neuronal stimulation upon subsequent stimulation. These changeable neuronal communications are a variable aspect of brain structure, representing another level of neuronal organization and, thus, another type of experiential construct. Since this variable aspect of brain structure is secondarily impacted by the surrounding reality through the invariant level of neuronal organization (i.e., the external experiential construct), we will relate this variable level of neuronal organization to the internal experiential construct, as depicted in figure 82. invariant level of neuronal organization sensory impact neuronal stimulation sensory nerve consistent connections between the invariant and variable levels of neuronal organization external experiential construct awareness internal experiential construct variable level of neuronal organization Figure 82 A diagrammatic representation of unchanging and changing neuronal communications in the brain, creating two levels of neuronal organization (left), corresponding to two different experiential constructs (right). When a sensory receptor is impacted, a nervous impulse is first transmitted along invariant neural pathways (upper boxed area), as a result of invariant neuronal connections. A sensory impact upon a specific sensory area creates a neuronal stimulation along a specific neural pathway within the invariant level of neuronal organization (stippled neurons). The organizational structure represented by these invariant neural pathways functions as the external experiential construct, or the boundary that defines awareness in relation to the surrounding reality. Neuronal stimulation (i.e., the generation and transmission of an electrochemical nervous impulse) represents an impact upon the external experiential construct. Through the invariant neural pathways, a second level of neuronal organization is stimulated (lower boxed area). At this second level of neuronal organization, the neuronal connections are variable (dashed lines between neurons), resulting in the transmission of nervous impulses through the brain in variable patterns of neuronal stimulation through variable neural pathways. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 435 Neuronal stimulation of a specific variable area creates neuronal stimulation along a variable neural pathway within the variable level of neuronal organization (stippled neurons). The organizational structure represented by these variable neural pathways functions as an internal experiential construct. Neuronal stimulation of these variable neural pathways represents an impact upon the internal experiential construct. Note that consistent connections exist between the invariant and variable levels of neuronal organization, so that stimulation of a specific invariant neural pathway results in the stimulation of a specific variable area. The changeability of the variable level of neuronal organization lies within that level itself, not in its connection to the invariant level of neuronal organization. The importance of this consistency of connection between these two levels of neuronal organization is discussed below. 3.22 Relationships between the external and internal experiential constructs Although the invariant and variable levels of neuronal organization represent different aspects of brain structure, they are, of course, related and interconnected. The relationship between the external and internal experiential constructs is consistent, as was depicted in figure 82. The variability of organizational structure that forms the internal experiential construct exists as a variability within the internal experiential construct itself, not as a variability between the external and internal experiential constructs, as depicted in figure 83. sensory impact sensory nerve consistent variable consistent connection connections connection awareness somewhere-else sensory nerve sensory impact impacts upon certain areas of the external experiential construct produce impacts upon certain areas of the internal experiential construct Figure 83 The consistency of the relationship of the external experiential construct to the internal experiential construct. Impacts upon the external experiential construct ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 436 through the sensory nerves also impact the internal experiential construct in consistent areas, through consistent connections between the neurons forming the external and internal experiential constructs, as depicted in figure 82. The variability of the internal experiential construct involves variable connections between the neurons that make up the internal experiential construct itself, not a variability between the neurons that connect the external to the internal experiential construct. We can think of the internal experiential construct as being at one level a mirror image of the external experiential construct, wherein areas of the internal experiential construct correspond to areas of the external experiential construct, so that an impact upon a certain area of the external experiential construct results in an impact upon the corresponding area of the internal experiential construct. Although the variable neural pathways are unstable, at any point in time they form a stable structure, an existent level of neuronal organization. The variability of the internal experiential construct depends on its ability to change its organizational structure according to the pattern of neuronal stimulation by which it‘s impacted through the external experiential construct. How impacts upon the external experiential construct affect the organizational structure of the internal experiential construct is depicted in figure 84. impacts upon certain areas of the external experiential construct sensory impact impacts upon certain areas of the internal experiential construct produce consistent variable connections connection awareness simulataneous impacts upon the internal experiential construct sensory impact consistent connection variable connections awareness ISSN: 2153-8212 consistent connection sensory impact newly associated impacts associations between areas of the internal experiential construct produce sensory impact variable consistent connection connections awareness primary impact Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. secondary impact by association www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 437 Figure 84 How simultaneous or contemporaneous impacts upon the internal experiential construct create new associations between different areas of the internal experiential construct, thereby altering the organizational structure of the internal experiential construct. (Top) Impacts upon the external and internal experiential constructs represent different patterns of neuronal stimulation. Impacts upon the external experiential construct come through the sensory nerves. Then, through the invariant neural pathways of the external experiential construct, the variable neural pathways of the internal experiential construct are impacted. Before any external stimulation, the internal experiential construct is a mirror image or duplicate of the external experiential construct. The external experiential construct is impacted in one area, and this impact forms a corresponding impact upon the internal experiential construct in a corresponding area. In this case, there has been no alteration of the organizational structure of the internal experiential construct, as the internal experiential construct simply mirrors the impact upon the external experiential construct. (Left) Now, the external experiential construct is impacted in two areas simultaneously, forming, then, two simultaneous impacts upon the corresponding areas of the internal experiential construct. The occurrence of these two simultaneous or contemporaneous impacts upon the internal experiential construct induces a new communication between these two areas of the internal experiential construct (dashed line), thereby changing the organizational structure of the internal experiential construct. In terms of patterns of neuronal stimulation, the simultaneous or contemporaneous stimulation of these two neural pathways within the variable level of neuronal organization essentially creates a new neural pathway (i.e., a new way the internal experiential construct can be impacted). (Right) Now, the external experiential construct is impacted in only one of those two areas, causing only one impact upon the corresponding area of the internal experiential construct. However, because an association was previously created between this area and another area of the internal experiential construct, the associated area of the internal experiential construct can be secondarily impacted through this association, even though there has been no impact upon the corresponding area of the external experiential construct. In terms of patterns of neuronal stimulation, the stimulation of one area of the variable level of neuronal organization can, through previously established neural pathways, stimulate other areas of the variable level of neuronal organization, thereby re-creating a previous pattern of neuronal stimulation. Essentially, stimulation of one invariant neuronal area, which then excites one variable neuronal area, can secondarily induce stimulation of another variable neuronal area (right, figure 84) if associative pathways were formed between these variable neuronal areas during a previous episode of neuronal stimulation (left, figure 84). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 438 This change in the organizational structure of the internal experiential construct depicted in figure 84 represents a new communication between two areas of the internal experiential construct, creating an association between areas that were not previously associated. In other words, simultaneous stimulation of different neuronal areas induces a change in neuronal communications, altering the overall organizational structure of the brain, altering neural pathways within the brain, and thereby allowing new patterns of neuronal stimulation to be formed. This ability to form new neuronal communications and new neural pathways is what makes this level of neuronal organization variable. Furthermore, this variability of neuronal communication is what distinguishes this variable level of neuronal organization from the invariant level of neuronal organization, where neuronal communications are unchanging. Although the brain probably has many different levels of organization, this difference in overall organizational structure is what creates two functioning experiential constructs, i.e., two different relational levels where existence impacts itself and so becomes defined in relation to itself. In this way, consciousness-existence can become sandwiched as awareness between both externally and internally defining whereness constructs, and so become bounded externally and internally by different experiences of reality. With that said, we will now relate impacts upon the external and internal experiential constructs to our awareness of physical and mental experiences. 3.3 Relating the two experiential constructs to experiential functions In the previous subsection, an invariant level of neuronal organization within the brain was related to an external experiential construct, and a variable level of neuronal organization within the brain was related to an internal experiential construct. Stimulation of these two different levels of neuronal organization was described as representing impacts upon the two different experiential constructs those two levels of organization represent. Remembering that an impact upon an experiential construct exists as an experience for the awareness localized and defined by that experiential construct, we have now laid the groundwork for relating impacts upon the external experiential construct to physical experience, and for relating impacts upon the internal experiential construct to mental experience. Different structures generally exist to perform different functions. Thus, the invariant and variable aspects of brain structure exist to perform somewhat different functions. Although the function of both aspects of brain structure is to create an experiential reality, the type of experience each is designed to create is different. The invariant level of neuronal organization is designed to perform a certain function: to provide an impactive interface that creates consistent experiences when our awareness is impacted by the same general types of stimuli. Those consistent experiences, formed by impacts upon the external experiential construct, are what we‘re aware of as physical experience. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 439 The variable neural pathways, which compose a different level of neuronal organization, have evolved to perform a different experiential function: to provide an impactive interface that creates an association between experiences according to the patterns by which our awareness is impacted by the same general types of stimuli. Impacts upon the internal experiential construct are what we‘re aware of as mental experience. The associations between experiences provided for by the variable neural pathways that compose the internal experiential construct are the foundation of the mental functions of memory, thought, and learning. These variable neural pathways also provide a variability of response to stimuli.8 What we know of physical or sensory experience is that it‘s relatively consistent. Hot remains hot, red remains red, sharp remains sharp. That is, under normal conditions, every time we touch a flame, it will be hot: every time we see a red ball, it will look red: and every time we‘re poked with a needle, it will feel sharp. The consistency of physical experience is due to an invariant level of neuronal organization that forms an invariant, externally defining experiential construct. What we know of mental experience is that it‘s changeable. What we think we‘ve learned one day we can learn differently on another. What we know one day we‘ve forgotten the next. With each experience, our mental conception of reality can be altered or reinforced. The changeability of mental experience is due to a variable level of neuronal organization that forms a variable, internally defining experiential construct. The variable level of neuronal organization is what allows us to learn, to incorporate new experiences, and to organize and associate those experiences with previous experiences. Learning is fundamentally a process of experiential association and is, then, primarily a function of the variable aspect of brain structure, i.e., a function of the internal experiential construct. For instance, if I touch my hand to an object and it feels hot, my brain structure, as reflected in its neuronal communications, is capable of changing in such a way that I will remember that this object is hot and so perhaps avoid touching it again. The first experience of the hotness of the object altered my variable neural pathways and, thus, my internal experiential construct in such a way that an association was created between the areas of the internal experiential construct corresponding to the visual experience of the object and the physical experience of hotness. Now, if the object is visually experienced again, the stimulation of the same area of the internal experiential construct in the same way, through the external experiential construct, can result in the area of the internal experiential construct corresponding to the visual experience neuronally communicating with and impacting the area of the internal experiential construct corresponding to the physical experience of hotness, thereby recalling a memory (i.e., a mental experience) of hotness associated with the object, in the absence of actually touching the object again. Putting 8 Although we’re here concerned with how experience is formed, not with the organism’s response to experience, it’s helpful to note that the variable level of neuronal organization also provides an important variability of response to stimuli. The variable neuronal pathways are evolutionarily advantageous, for they allow the organism to fine-tune its responses to stimuli on the basis of previous stimulus/response situations. Without the variability in mental experience and response that the internal experiential construct provides, we would always respond in the same way to the same stimulus or, more importantly, the same sets of stimuli, regardless of the previous outcome of such a response. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 440 these two experiences together later, when the object is only visually experienced, is called remembering—i.e., literally, putting back together—the simultaneous experiences of object and hotness. (This basic mechanism of experiential association was diagrammed in figure 84.) Being able to remember that this object can be hot also means that I‘ve learned something. In terms of patterns of neuronal stimulation, if a certain pattern of neuronal stimulation occurs, that primary pattern of neuronal stimulation can, through variable neuronal communications, induce a previously associated pattern of neuronal stimulation, thereby inducing a secondary pattern of neuronal stimulation within the variable level of neuronal organization in the absence of the direct sensory input that would normally evoke such a pattern of neuronal stimulation. For example, the experience of hotness can be remembered even when we‘re not touching something hot, i.e., even when the invariant neural pathways (i.e., external experiential construct) aren‘t being impacted in a way that we‘d be aware of as the physical experience of hotness. Individual physical or sensory experiences can occur in different patterns, creating different patterns of neuronal stimulation within the internal experiential construct through its consistent connections to the external experiential construct. The external experiential construct is unaffected by these patterns of neuronal stimulation, since the neural pathways that form the external experiential construct are invariant. However, the structure of the internal experiential construct forms in accord with these patterns of neuronal stimulation, since the internal experiential construct represents the variable neuronal communications and neural pathways formed in response to associated stimuli. Again, these variable neural pathways functioning as the internal experiential construct are the basis of the mental phenomenon we call memory, i.e., the ability to recall and reconstruct (i.e., re-member) experiences through previous association with other experiences. Thought is a mental phenomenon related to memory. Memory is an attempt to recall the order of what has already been experienced. Thought involves associating experiences that may not have been previously associated. What happened? I‘m trying to remember. What are you going to do? I‘m thinking. Both mental processes involve associating past experiences. One mental process involves trying to reassemble past experiences into the order in which they were experienced, and the other involves putting past experiences together to create new experiential associations between physical experiences that need not have been previously associated. In this way, thought is an evolutionary extension of the memory or re-membering function of the internal experiential construct. As discussed previously, the process of experience by nature fragments or divides what we experience as reality into separate experiential components.9 Since each experience must be formed by a discrete impact upon an experiential construct, experiences are by nature separate. This experiential separation first occurs at the level of the external experiential construct, where the experience of physical reality is formed. If we touch a hot object, that experience is fragmented by the external experiential construct into an impact that‘s the visual experience of the object, and an experience of its temperature or hotness, as well as an experience of its hardness or softness. The function of the internal experiential construct is to reassemble (i.e., re9 See Article 4, subsection 5.311. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 441 member), as much as possible, the experiences of reality fragmented by the functioning of the external experiential construct. Again, this re-membering function of the internal experiential construct is performed through the creation of associations and new communications between areas of the internal experiential construct that are impacted simultaneously, contemporaneously, or in some other pattern. Note that impacts upon the internal experiential construct also occur as discrete events. However, the ability of the internal experiential construct to associate and overlap discrete experiences allows a functional reunification of experience. Note also that this reassembly isn‘t always accurate and can never recreate what exists directly at the level of reality beyond experience. By way of analogy, we can consider what exists before experience as an uncut puzzle, a kind of picture of what-is. In this analogy, the functioning of the external experiential construct (i.e., sensory experience) is what allows us to experience the picture of what-is, but in order to do so, it must cut up what-is into pieces and so create a puzzle. Thus, in a way, physical experience involves the dis-memberment of existence. The internal experiential construct (i.e., the mind) then functions to re-member existence, to put the pieces back together in their proper order, or into what is conceived to be their proper order. Two things must be remembered in this analogy. First, the pieces don‘t actually exist as such except as they‘re created by the experiential process. This is why, when physicists are examining the smallest parts of physical reality, it begins to behave like a rainbow, i.e., as a relative reality.10 Second, owing to the relational nature of the pieces, any mental reassembly of the pieces into even the most accurate representation or conceptualization must still fall short of presenting us with an experience of what-is as it exists directly, i.e., as an undivided whole. Experience simply cannot do this. To get there, we must move into the reality beyond experience and simply be that.11 3.31 The character of mental and physical experiences Fundamentally, our awareness is consciousness-existence that has become localized to a relative somewhere, with that somewhere defined by external and internal experiential constructs. Those externally and internally defining experiential constructs then exist as the basis of the respective 10 As long as the mind takes at face value the existence of physical reality in the defined, separate form in which it’s presented, experience at the quantum level, where reality behaves as if it’s undefined and nonseparate, remains incomprehensible to the mind, for the sensory experience of part-ness cannot be reconciled with the quantum experience of non-part-ness. Once the mind realizes that the apparent definability and separability of the parts is an artifact of experience, a necessary product of the way reality is presented to it, the mind can let go of its attachment to an ultimately defined reality. Within this context the mind can then begin to conceive of the more fundamental underlying unity that is the basis of the perceived and conceived part-ness of physical reality. To learn it’s often necessary to let go. To understand a new concept, more often than not, an old concept must be discarded or, at least, modified. We can’t learn that 2+2=4 if we’re convinced that 2+2=3. Likewise, we can’t learn that nothing in relation to itself gives us the experience of something (0 + 0 = 1) unless we can get past the idea that 0 + 0 = 0. 11 Experience must always present the whole in terms of its parts, even when the parts are described as being inseparable. This work is an example of this. In order to present the unified model of reality, that model had to be discussed, described, dissected, and pictured in terms of its parts, i.e., the reality cells. We can infer and point out the underlying wholeness, but what we still have are defined parts assembled into an interconnected whole. What actually exists is a whole with no real parts. Parts as separable and definable entities exist only within the context of the experiential process. Any description of reality is, in this way, limited. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 442 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience physical and mental experiences associated with our awareness. In other words, we are aware of physical and mental experiences as the boundaries that define where consciousness exists. What other evidence is there that physical experience is our awareness of an impact upon the external experiential construct, and that mental experience is our awareness of an impact upon the internal experiential construct? The evidence exists in the very nature and character of our mental and physical experiences. All around us, we‘re aware of physical experience, while within we‘re aware of mental experience. Bordering our awareness externally is the experience of physical reality, while bordering our awareness internally is the experience of mental reality. There‘s a reason we‘re aware of physical reality as being ―out there‖ or outside, and of mental reality as being ―in here‖ or inside. The reason we‘re aware of physical experience as ―out there‖ is that the external experiential construct, the form of which exists as physical experience, is the boundary or dividing line which externally defines where we are, i.e., which externally defines our awareness. The reason we‘re aware of mental experience as ―in here‖ is that the internal experiential construct, the form of which exists as mental experience, is the boundary or dividing line which internally defines where we are, i.e., which internally defines our awareness. If both mental and physical experiences represent our awareness of impacts upon an experiential construct, why are they different? The difference is found in the orientation of our awareness to each experiential construct and, thereby, in the relationship between our awareness and the impact upon the experiential construct that is the experience. Essentially, a penetration of the external experiential construct extends toward our awareness, while a penetration of the internal experiential construct extends away from our awareness. This difference in orientation creates an awareness of complementary impactive forms or, in other words, an awareness of complementary experiential forms. These complementary experiential forms exist as our awareness of physical and mental experiences, as depicted in figure 85. the internal construct external construct the external construct sensory invarient nerve impact connection variable connections physical experience internal construct awareness mental experience awareness (somewhere) somewhere-else Figure 85 Physical and mental experiences represent the awareness of impacts upon the external and internal experiential constructs, respectively. Through impactive interactions, consciousness becomes defined in relation to itself as a somewhere/somewhere-else duality. (Left) Consciousness that has the quality of being ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 443 somewhere or a-where is awareness. The relative existence of consciousness as awareness includes the boundaries which define that awareness. The impacts upon those boundaries exist as what the awareness so defined experiences as reality. Therefore, an awareness that has two different boundaries, being defined by both external and internal experiential constructs, will be aware of two fundamentally different types of experience, owing to the difference in orientation of the awareness to the impacts upon each of these boundaries (right). Whereas impacts upon the external experiential construct penetrate into the awareness, creating a physical experience, impacts upon the internal experiential construct penetrate out of the awareness, creating a mental experience. (It‘s no coincidence that the word ―mind,‖ which we use to represent the realm of mental experience, sounds like the word ―mined,‖ which refers to an inward penetration, as in ―That mountain has been mined for gold.‖) What do we consider as physical experience, and what do we consider as mental experience? The description of physical experience is fairly straightforward: What we see, hear, smell, taste, and touch are all physical experiences. Mental experience is somewhat more nebulous than physical experience because mental experiences, by nature, are less tangible or sensible than physical experiences. Basically, memory, thought, and learning compose mental experiences. In general, we call physical experiences the forms of perception, and mental experiences the forms of conception. This difference between the tangibility of physical experiences and the intangibility of mental experiences correlates with the complementary impactive forms depicted in figure 85. Mental and physical experiences both have form. Physical reality has form and is tangible, whereas memory and thought also have form but are intangible. So, we may consider physical experiences as tangible forms, and mental experiences as intangible forms. Physical and mental experiences, in this way, represent complementary types of form, i.e., tangible and intangible, respectively. Whereas impacts upon each experiential construct represent a penetration of that construct, with respect to the orientation of the awareness to those impacts, those impacts are complementary, being opposite in form relative to the awareness. That complementarity of impactive form, relative to an awareness defined by those experiential constructs, is what gives physical and mental experiences their complementarity of form, i.e., tangible and intangible, respectively. The complementary forms of physical and mental experiences resulting from an awareness of these complementary alterations of the experiential constructs are analogous to the way in which complementary impactive interactions create the complementary wave and particle experiences. As previously described, in physical experience, impacts that penetrate into the experiencerawareness exist as a particle experience, while impacts that penetrate out of the experiencerawareness exist as a wave experience. Particles seem to have a graspable, tangible form, while waves have an ungraspable, intangible form. Physical reality, as the experience of tangible form, and because it seems to extend toward us, toward our awareness, correlates with an impact upon the external experiential construct that ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 444 penetrates into our awareness. Mental reality, as the experience of intangible form, and because it seems to extend away from us, away from our awareness, correlates with an impact upon the internal experiential construct that penetrates out of our awareness. Physical and mental experiences represent an even more fundamental penetrating/penetrated complementarity than that which creates wave/particle duality, for waves and particles are both physical experiences. Physical reality, in general, is analogous to particle-like physical experience, existing as a penetration into the observer-awareness, creating a relatively tangible form, a form surrounded by the awareness, a form the awareness can grasp or ―get hold of.‖ Mental reality, in general, is analogous to wavelike physical experience, existing as a penetration out of the observer-awareness, creating a relatively intangible form, a form surrounding the awareness, a form the awareness can‘t grasp or ―get hold of.‖ 3.32 The experiential theater We look outward, and there we find physical reality. We look inward, and here we find mental reality. However, by now it may be becoming clear that what we‘re aware of as these experiences of reality aren‘t what exists directly where our particular experience seems to be. For instance, when we see or touch a rock, our experience of the rock isn‘t what exists directly where the rock seems to be. Rather, what we experience as the rock is a relationship between what‘s there directly and what we are here directly. In the absence of that relationship, the rock, as it‘s experienced to exist, simply doesn‘t. Experiential reality comes into existence through the formation of a relationship between a differentiated area of reality and the surrounding reality. Certainly, there‘s some correlation between what we experience as physical reality and what‘s there directly where our physical experience seems to be, but they‘re by no means the same thing. For instance, it‘s common knowledge that when we look up at the stars at night, we‘re seeing light that left the stars millions or perhaps billions of years ago. So, the pattern of stars we see in the sky actually has very little to do with the current distribution of stars out in space. So, if what we‘re seeing as the pattern of stars in the night sky isn‘t what‘s there directly where the stars seem to be, then where is this pattern happening, where does this pattern exist? In the differentiated area of reality we call our brain, as a pattern of neuronal stimulation that we‘re then aware of as our experience of stars in the sky. Let‘s extend this line of reasoning to other visual experiences. It takes light from the Sun approximately 8 minutes to reach the Earth. So, where we see the Sun is where it was 8 minutes ago. Again, we‘re not seeing what‘s there directly; we‘re seeing a pattern of neuronal stimulation created by light from out there impacting our awareness in here. The same is true regarding your experience of the work you‘re now reading, or of any other seemingly stationary object. What you‘re seeing as this work and reading as the words on the page aren‘t what exists directly where they seem to be. What you‘re experiencing are patterns of neuronal stimulation that you‘re then aware of as the words on the page of this work. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 445 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience The words that you‘re reading may seem to be out there, the world you experience may seem to be out there, but they‘re really not. They exist and are happening within the differentiated area of reality we call the brain. We‘re aware of these experiences because the brain, through its neuronal activity, functions as an impactive interface, allowing the localization of consciousness into awareness. Experience is what our awareness is aware of as the neuronal activity that defines it as awareness. Essentially, what we’re aware of as experience is neuronal activity occurring within the brain.12 The same holds true for all of our organic physical senses. What we see, hear, smell, taste, and touch are all basically patterns of neuronal stimulation that somehow correlate with what‘s out there, but still aren‘t really that. Stimulation of the level of neuronal organization within the brain that forms the external experiential construct exists as the experience of physical reality. Stimulation of the level of neuronal organization within the brain that forms the internal experiential construct exists as the experience of mental reality. Physical reality seems to exist in the area we call space, and mental reality seems to exist in the area we call mind. However, even space and mind are themselves both experiential realities, not ―places‖ that actually exist as such, independent of our experience of them. These areas that we call space and mind are actually arenas (an arena being a defined area), and these arenas themselves aren‘t other than our experience of the external and internal experiential constructs functioning as a type of experiential theater, as illustrated in figure 86. the internal construct the external construct mind space physical experience mental experience space physical experience space physical experience space space is the place between physical experiences l c o n a l i t n s a e y e al r t s r t ic p x s a u e y c c h e t p r mind awareness of mental experience awareness mind mental experience mind m e i n n t c u d t n t e a r l n this is literaly what is being mined m i s r e a l i t y n a l c o r t 12 More accurately, what we’re aware of as experience is impacts upon the structure of the differentiated area of reality we experience as brain. We could also say that what we’re aware of as experience are alterations or fluctuations in the distortion field associated with the compound distortion process we experience as brain. However, since these descriptions are rather cumbersome, we will simply refer to experience as neuronal activity, understanding that neuronal activity is itself our experience and description of what’s happening in the brain, and therefore isn’t what’s happening directly. Neuronal stimulation really means an impact upon differentiated existence, and since differentiated existence consists of areas of compound distortion processes, an impact upon a compound distortion process implies some alteration in the configuration of that compound distortion process, with a corresponding alteration in the distortion field associated with that compound process. That alteration in the distortion field corresponds to neuronal stimulation, and that alteration is the experience itself. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 446 Figure 86 The external and internal experiential constructs function as an experiential theater by providing variable surfaces for the extension of experiential reality toward or away from our awareness. In this way, our awareness becomes surrounded by physical and mental experiences that seem be taking place within the arenas of space and mind. However, space and mind are themselves just as much experiential realities as are the physical and mental experiential realities for which they seem to provide an arena. That is, neither space nor mind exists as such, independent of an awareness of those experiential realities. Physical experience is a penetration of the external experiential construct into awareness, and space is the complementary experience of the external experiential construct where it doesn‘t penetrate into awareness. That is, in relation to the penetration of the external experiential construct into awareness that is physical-object experience, the areas of the external experiential construct between these inward penetrations exist as relative invaginations of the external experiential construct, or as not-object experiences. Thus, we‘re aware of the complementary experiences of physical objects (―things‖) and the physical area (or space) those things seem to exist within. Space isn‘t no-experience, or the lack of experience; space is the experience of noobject in relation to object-experience. Likewise, mental experience is a penetration of the internal experiential construct out of awareness, and mind is the complementary experience of the internal experiential construct where it doesn‘t penetrate away out of awareness. That is, in relation to the penetration of the internal experiential construct out of the awareness that is thought-experience, the areas of the internal experiential construct between these outward penetrations exist as relative invasions of the internal experiential construct, or as not-thought experiences. Thus, we‘re aware of the complementary experiences of mental objects (―thoughts‖) and the mental area (or mind) those thoughts seem to exist within. Mind isn‘t no-experience, or the lack of experience; mind is the experience of no-thought in relation to thought experience. Now, we could ask, why isn‘t mind, as an experiential reality, a physical experience if it represents a relative penetration into awareness; and why isn‘t space, as an experiential reality, a mental experience if it represents a relative penetration out of awareness, as depicted in figure 86? Because space exists as such only in relation to complementary physical-object experiences (―things‖), and likewise mind exists as such only in relation to complementary mental-object experiences (―thoughts‖). However, although space as an awareness of the external experiential construct is a physical reality, and mind as an awareness of the internal experiential construct is a mental reality, space as a relative penetration out of awareness has an intangible quality, and mind as a relative penetration into awareness has a tangible quality. Doesn‘t mind exist as a tangible experience, as something we can grasp, something we can to some degree manipulate as we do tangible physical objects in order to form thoughts and recall memories? And doesn‘t space exist as an intangible experience, as something we can‘t grasp, as something we can‘t manipulate as we do tangible physical objects? Thus, although space is a physical experiential reality, in that it exists ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 447 as an awareness of the external experiential construct, it has an intangible quality because it‘s a relative penetration out of awareness. Likewise, although mind is a mental experiential reality, in that it exists as an awareness of the internal experiential construct, it has a tangible quality because it‘s a relative penetration into awareness. What exists is a relational matrix, absolute existence existing in relation to itself. As the relational matrix differentiates and impacts itself, then and only then do physical and mental experiences come into existence, along with the associated awareness of space and mind, together forming our experience of physical and mental reality. Without an awareness to experience space, there‘s no space; there‘s then only what-is as it is. Without an awareness to experience mind, there‘s no mind; there‘s then only what-is as it is. Most of us go through life assuming that what we see ―out there‖ as physical reality is what‘s really there, whether we‘re ―here‖ to experience it or not. Yet the fact is, whatever we‘re seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching must all be taking place within our head, within the differentiated area of reality we call the brain. It‘s not happening as we experience it to exist, out there, beyond our body. What we experience as physical reality is our awareness of how our brain is being neuronally stimulated. Look all around you. What you‘re seeing is all taking place within the confines of your personal experiential theater. This same type of analysis applies to our experiences of mental reality; however, such an analysis is more difficult, owing to the intangible nature of mental reality. For this reason, the rest of this discussion will focus primarily upon physical experience and physical reality, with the understanding that what we say about the nature of physical reality applies also to mental reality. If what we experience as physical reality isn‘t really what‘s out there but is actually occurring within our head, within our brain, then why does it seem to be ―out there‖? In order to understand more clearly how patterns of neuronal stimulation within the brain come to exist as physical experiences ―out there,‖ we need to understand what experience is most fundamentally. When we‘re aware of experience, what we‘re aware of is fundamentally something in relation to nothing, or more precisely, the some-thing of experiential reality superimposed on the no-thing of unexperienced existence. As explained previously, when differentiated, yet undefined, areas of reality impact each other, they can become defined in relation to each other, and in this way something (i.e., sum-thing) arises between the two inseparable nothings. Existence has no real boundaries, no ultimately real way of being separated from itself; yet, through a process of repetitive and progressive self-relation, the indefinable creates definition, and the inseparable creates separation. As depicted in various ways in figures 73 and 77 through 80, where differentiated existence impacts itself there is something, and that something defines awareness and is also what the awareness experiences as reality. That something is the experiential construct. Different forms of the experiential construct yield the awareness of different experiences, different somethings. Therefore, all experience is really nothing more than the awareness of something against a ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 448 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience background of nothing, as depicted in figure 73. Visual experience consists of shades of light against a background of darkness—something in relation to nothing. Auditory experience consists of variations of sound against a background of silence—again, something in relation to nothing. This relationship between something and nothing is the basis of all experience. With regard to human existence, where neuronal activity occurs, there exists an experiential construct; where neuronal activity doesn‘t occur, there exists no experiential construct. Where an experiential construct exists, there‘s something; where an experiential construct doesn‘t exist, there‘s nothing. Where something exists, there‘s experience; where something doesn‘t exist, there‘s no experience. Essentially, the pattern of neuronal stimulation within the brain is the something-in-relation-to-nothing that exists as experience. The neuronal activity of the brain functions in relation to awareness somewhat like a movie playing on a screen in relation to the audience. In this way, the brain functions as an experiential theater, providing the variable surface upon which experience occurs, while simultaneously defining an area of consciousness-existence as awareness, i.e., as the ―audience,‖ as depicted in figure 87. something (sum-thing) something (experience) awareness no-thing differentiated reality no-thing differentiated reality unexperienced reality nothing nothing o n al r u e n a c t i v i ty so the screen in the experiential theater m e t h i awareness (audience) (nothing) (nothing) ex p e r i e n g n ce the brain Figure 87 How the brain functions as an experiential theater. (Left) The experiential process. Where nothing meets nothing and becomes defined in relation to itself, the something of experience comes to exist. (Middle) The experiential process represented by the Ouroboros symbol, wherein a snake consumes itself (see middle, figure 78). The experiential process, whereby existence impacts itself, can also be considered existence consuming itself. As existence consumes itself—i.e., impacts itself on all sides—it exists in relation to itself as somewhere (i.e., a whereness or awareness) in relation to somewhere else. (Right) For us, the brain functions as the impactive interface that allows existence to become defined in relation to itself, thereby creating something out of nothing. Impacts upon the brain exist in the form of neuronal activity. Neuronal activity is the something-in-relation-to-nothing that the awareness is aware of as experience. That is, the awareness defined by that neuronal activity experiences that neuronal activity as reality. Our awareness is surrounded by physical experiences that seem to be ―out there‖ because our awareness is actually defined, bordered, and so surrounded by the something-in-relation-to-nothing that these experiences represent. In this way, awareness becomes surrounded by experience. So, in relation to our ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 449 awareness, the neuronal activity that exists as physical experience seems to be ―out there,‖ allowing what we call the brain to function as an experiential theater. In a theater, different aspects of the movie experience come through different components within the theater. There‘s the screen upon which the visual component is played, and there are the speakers from which comes the auditory component. The experiential theater that is the brain also cosists of different components, each responsible for presenting us with a different experiential modality. In the brain, these different components are represented by the differentiation of the brain into different anatomical areas, each responsible for receiving, integrating, and neuronally reacting to different types of sensory input. In this way, the brain presents different types of physical experience to the awareness that‘s defined by its neuronal activity. The evolution of the brain can be thought of as the expansion of an impactive interface. Within the context of this discussion, the evolutionary expansion of the cranial area of the neural tube into what we call the brain can also be said to represent an ongoing remodeling of the experiential theater, wherein new experiential modalities are added and already-existent experiential modalities are expanded and refined. The addition of new experiential modalities is analogous to adding sound to movies, or to adding a sound card and speakers to a computer system. The expansion and refinement of already-existent experiential modalities is analogous to building a larger screen, or getting a bigger TV or computer monitor, so that whatever movie is being shown on the screen is composed of more pixels, or, in the case of the brain, more neurons, resulting in higher resolution and more detail available in the experience. Each different type of physical experience represents something in relation to nothing. Why does the something of visual experience have a different form from the something of auditory experience, or of olfactory experience, if they‘re all fundamentally just patterns of neuronal stimulation? How does the brain, through its neuronal activity, present awareness with apparently different somethings, with different types of physical experience? The answer lies in the question. The different types of physical experience represent different forms of something in relation to nothing. In terms of the something of physical experience, we‘re talking about patterns of neuronal stimulation. Therefore, different somethings, different physical experiences, must somehow represent different patterns of neuronal stimulation occurring within the different areas of the brain responsible for presenting awareness with each of the different components of physical experience. Our experience of the three primary colors (red, yellow, and green) is caused by our optical sensors being impacted by three different frequencies of electromagnetic radiation. Let‘s use this as an analogy and say then that the different types of physical experience (sight, sound, etc.) could each represent different frequencies of neuronal activity, thereby presenting awareness with different experiential forms, as different forms of something in relation to nothing,13 as depicted in figure 88. 13 Whether or not the frequency of neuronal activity is actually the differentiating factor between physical experiences may or may not be the case. Nonetheless, it’s useful in terms of explaining the general concept regarding how different ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience nothing different types of physical experience touch different somethings (frequency of neuronal activity) 450 (different somethings) taste/smell awareness sound sight Figure 88 How the different forms of something-in-relation-to-nothing created as differentiated existence impacts itself can account for the different types of physical experience. Different areas of the brain may have evolved to produce different patterns of neuronal stimulation, different forms of something-in-relation-to-nothing, and in that way present awareness with different experiential forms. Patterns of neuronal stimulation in the brain exist as experience. Yet some patterns of neuronal stimulation yield the experience of light, others the experience of sound, etc. Since it‘s all patterns of neuronal stimulation, the difference must be in the pattern itself. Since neuronal activity represents something in relation to nothing, different patterns of neuronal stimulation (e.g., different frequencies of neuronal activity, as shown on the left) represent different somethings, and so these differences may be responsible for awareness being presented with the different types of physical experience. Having explained in the most general terms how neuronal activity exists as the form of physical experience, we can now examine another aspect of the architecture of the brain in terms of how it functions as an experiential theater. Each different area of the brain responsible for a different type of physical experience is comparable to a different wall or screen in the whole room of experience. These experiential walls or screens are only two-dimensional—i.e., they‘re essentially flat, as a movie or TV screen is a flat, two-dimensional surface. Yet we are presented with physical experiences in three dimensions; for instance, we are able to localize visual and auditory stimuli in three dimensions. How does the relatively flat surface of the experiential theater present us with these threedimensional experiences, i.e., experiences that have depth? This three-dimensionality exists because the brain is, for the most part, bilaterally symmetrical, consisting of communicating halves. Essentially, the neuronal activity of the brain occurs in stereo. What this means is that, for most sensory input, two slightly different patterns of neuronal stimulation are created in the experiential forms can be presented to awareness within the context of the same underlying process of neuronal activity. There’s differentiation, and there’s unity. There’s a single process, neuronal activity, that we’re aware of as different types of physical experience. Between the unity and the differentiation, there’s some variability, some difference in the pattern of neuronal stimulation yielding different physical experiences. This difference may be in frequency, or it may be in some other factor, some other pattern of neuronal stimulation. The important thing here is the overall concept that some variability in the same underlying process, i.e., neuronal activity, is responsible for the different types of physical experience. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 451 two halves of the brain, resulting in the awareness that‘s defined by these patterns of neuronal stimulation being presented with two slightly different experiences originating from the same stimulus. When these two different experiences are overlapped, or superimposed upon each other, the awareness of the combined experiential form has depth, or three-dimensionality. In this way, the awareness of overlapping experiences, each occurring in different halves of the brain, gives the show playing in the experiential theater a depth, a three-dimensionality, that the individual experiences themselves do not really have. The process of getting a three-dimensional experience from two two-dimensional experiences is most easily related to visual experience. Close one eye, and what you see is a two-dimensional image. Open that eye and close the other, and what you see is a slightly different twodimensional image, by virtue of the fact that human eyes see a scene from two viewpoints separated laterally by about 2½ inches. The two viewpoints each show slightly different spatial relationships between near and distant objects. Open both eyes, and each two-dimensional image contributes to the awareness of a three-dimensional visual experience, as depicted in figure 89. two-dimensional experiences awareness awareness awareness three-dimensional experiences awareness Figure 89 Three-dimensional experiences are actually composed of two twodimensional experiences. (Left) With one eye open, the visual impacts from two different areas of relational-matrix distortion are transmitted to only one half of the brain, creating a flat or two-dimensional object-experience. (Right) With both eyes ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 452 open, the visual impacts from those two different areas of relational-matrix distortion are transmitted to both halves of the brain, creating two slightly different flat or twodimensional object experiences. When the awareness of each of these two-dimensional experiences is combined into the awareness of a single experience by overlapping the two two-dimensional experiences, a three-dimensional experience is created. The difference between the experiences from each side of the brain is that the closer area of relational-matrix distortion will have more lateral transposition in the combined visual field than the farther area of relational-matrix distortion, so that when the experiences from each half of the brain are superimposed upon each other, this greater and lesser lateral transposition of the experienced objects in the visual field is translated into the experience of relative depth between the two objects. To demonstrate this translation, look at any two objects that are at different distances from you. Close one eye, then open it and close the other; repeat as many time as necessary. Notice that the closer object always moves more from side to side in the visual field relative to the farther object. In a very real way, the brain functions as an experiential theater that‘s showing a threedimensional movie—i.e., a movie filmed from two slightly different perspectives—so that, as those two perspectives become overlapped into a single experience, our awareness gets to enjoy the show in three-dimensions rather than just the two-dimensions it was originally filmed (i.e., experienced) in. The thing is, nowhere does there actually exist a three-dimensional image—i.e., there‘s no real depth to any single experience, to any single experiential form or impact. When the awareness of each two-dimensional experience is overlapped, a three-dimensional experience is created where there really are only two two-dimensional experiences. The experience of three- dimensions is a trick performed by the magician of awareness in the experiential theater by virtue of the brain having two halves, so that the awareness of experience occurs in stereo. Thus, the only place where three-dimensional experience exists is in relation to a single awareness of two overlapping two-dimensional experiences. The fact that we experience what are really two-dimensional images as three-dimensional images illustrates clearly that what we experience doesn‘t exist as we experience it to exist, independent of our awareness. That is, what we‘re aware of as experience isn‘t and can‘t be what exists directly where the experience seems to be, but rather is the boundary or experiential construct that defines consciousness as awareness. Existence around us may really be three-dimensional, may really have depth, but we can‘t experience that three-dimensionality as it is directly because experience is fundamentally a twodimensional boundary, created when existence comes to exist in relation to itself and so becomes defined in relation to itself. In order to get around this experiential limitation, stereo experience evolved, so that when experiences from complementary areas in the two halves of the brain are combined or overlapped, awareness is presented with what appears to be a single experience that has a depth or three-dimensionality which correlates with what exists directly but still isn‘t that. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 453 For example, in stereo photography, where photographs are taken with two cameras or a twin camera with lenses 2 1/2 inches apart, the result is two flat two-dimensional photographic images. When these images are viewed through a stereoscope, so that the left eye sees only the picture taken by the left-hand lens and the right eye sees only the picture taken by the right-hand lens, the result is an experience of a single three-dimensional picture, a photograph that seems to have depth, just as real as the depth of normal stereo vision. But where‘s that depth, that threedimensionality? Nowhere but in our awareness of the two overlapping two-dimensional experiences. Likewise, where‘s the three-dimensionality of any visual or auditory experience? Nowhere but in our awareness of two overlapping two-dimensional experiences. There‘s no fundamental difference between the way stereo photography functions to create a three-dimensional-image experience out of two two-dimensional images, and the way the brain functions to present awareness with three-dimensional experiences created out of two twodimensional experiences. In each case, two two-dimensional experiences are combined or overlapped to create a single three-dimensional experience in relation to a single awareness. The three-dimensional images created by stereo photography are just as real (or unreal!) as the threedimensional experiences created by the bilaterally symmetrical structure of the brain. As with experience of any sort, these image experiences are occurring or existing only within the experiential theater of the brain, not ―out there‖ where they seem to be, as depicted in figure 90. _______________________________________ ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 454 Figure 90 What we‘re aware of as experiences ―out there‖ are actually occurring within our head, on the screen of our own experiential theater. These experiences seem to be ―out there‖ because our awareness is actually surrounded by these experiences, and so, relative to our awareness, these experiences really are out there. However, although the experiences may actually be out there relative to our awareness, they aren‘t really ―out there‖ relative to the differentiated area of existence where we are, i.e., beyond where we perceive our bodies to be. Actually, all experience is happening ―in here,‖ within the differentiated area of reality we call the brain. (Left) A visual impact occurs through one eye and so is experienced to be ―out there‖ in two-dimensions, as if on a flat screen (solid curve). (Right) A visual impact occurs through both eyes and so is experienced to be ―out there‖ in three-dimensions, seeming to dissolve the screen upon which experience occurs (dashed curve). The three-dimensionality of experience contributes greatly to making it seem that what we experience as ―out there‖ really is what‘s out there. Another reason why experience seems to be occurring ―out there,‖ beyond our bodies, is that our body, as a defined physical reality, is also part of our experience of physical reality. Our body is obviously outside of our brain, and we experience physical reality to extend beyond our body, and so it seems that what we experience must really be out there. However, what we experience as our body is just as relative, just as rainbow-like, as any other physical experience. That is, what we experience as our body isn‘t what exists directly where we experience our body to be. The physical experience of our body is just another part of the show playing upon the screen of the experiential theater. What lies beyond the screen of the experiential theater? The same thing (or no-thing) that exists within the confines of the experiential theater—i.e., consciousness. What exists directly ―out there‖ where we experience something to be is no different from what exists directly ―in here‖ where we are. What exists directly ―in here‖ is differentiated consciousness, i.e., consciousness existing in a state of self-relation. What exists directly ―out there‖ also is differentiated consciousness. When differentiated consciousness impacts itself, thereby becoming defined in relation to itself, consciousness so defined then exists as an experiencer/experienced duality. Although we need a functioning brain in order to experience physical and mental reality, and although what we experience as reality depends on the pattern of neuronal stimulation within the brain, this explanation shouldn‘t be construed to imply that the brain itself is the source of awareness or consciousness. Brain function doesn‘t create awareness; it creates experience, which localizes what already exists everywhere as consciousness into what exists somewhere as awareness. The difference is subtle, yet vital. Nothing can create awareness, because nothing creates consciousness. Consciousness is what-is, and awareness is ultimately consciousness. Existence existing in relation to itself creates something, the something-out-of-nothing of experience. Nothing in relation to itself turns nowhere into somewhere. This is the wonder of relative existence: An apparent something comes from nothing, albeit nothing existing in relation to itself. In this way, experience is the result of existence picking itself up by its own bootstraps, as it must, for there‘s nothing else. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 455 Each of us experiences a unique physical and mental reality. What we experience as reality exists because we are where we are, interacting with the rest of differentiated existence surrounding where we are. What we each experience as reality exists only within our own awareness. Every spectator at a sporting event has a unique experience of the game, for each individual is aware of the game only as it‘s played out within their own experiential theater. Why is it important to understand that experience isn‘t really what exists directly ―out there‖? Why is it necessary to understand the uniqueness of each individual‘s experience of reality? Because, for awareness, reality is whatever it experiences it to be. Awareness is nothing more than what exists everywhere as consciousness becoming defined by the something of experience. However, if, while functioning as awareness, we become caught up in the world of experience, mistaking the relativity of experiential reality for an absolutely or independently existent reality, we then also become confined by the limitations, boundaries, and definitions intrinsic to experiential reality, and so we lose sight of, become unaware of, our true nature as sat-chitananda, as existence-consciousness-bliss. Consciousness is unlimited, borderless, and undefined, whereas awareness is limited, bordered, and defined. When awareness becomes caught up in experiential reality, mistaking experiential reality for an independently existent reality, it literally becomes un-consciousness, or the opposite of consciousness. Since, for awareness, reality is whatever it experiences it to be, although awareness always remains what it is (i.e., consciousness), what awareness can experience itself to be is another matter entirely. For this reason, awareness can become unaware, can become unconscious of what it is, can become experientially cut off or separated from the consciousness that lies both within and beyond the screen of experience. In the upcoming sections, as we discuss emotional experience, we will also be examining how awareness becomes confined by its experience of reality and thereby becomes experientially separated from its larger consciousness-self. It will be helpful in the course of that discussion to understand how personal, individual, and unique each awareness‘ experience of reality is. Conceptual Checkpoint II-4 -There exists no experiential reality in the absence of an awareness of that reality. -The awareness of experience is formed as differentiated existence comes to exist in relation to itself at another relational level by impacting itself, thereby localizing what exists undivided everywhere into a somewhere/somewhere-else duality. -What exists absolutely everywhere is consciousness. What exists relatively somewhere is awareness. The boundary or dividing line that defines existence everywhere as existence somewhere is experience. -Consciousness localized to a relative somewhere through the process of self-relation functions as awareness. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 456 -Experience is what awareness is conscious or aware of as the boundary that defines what and where it is. -Experience is most fundamentally an awareness of something in relation to nothing. -The differentiated area of reality we experience as brain functions as the impactive interface that localizes what exists absolutely everywhere to a relative somewhere, creating our individual awareness. -We are surrounded by differentiated existence impacting us on all sides, localizing our awareness into a focal somewhere. -The boundary or dividing line that defines that focal somewhere is the experiential construct. -Owing to the brain functioning as both an invariant and a variable impactive interface, our awareness becomes sandwiched between externally and internally defining experiential constructs. -The external and internal experiential constructs exist as what our awareness experiences as reality. -Awareness of the external experiential construct corresponds to physical experience, and awareness of the internal experiential construct corresponds to mental experience. -Each awareness, each localization of consciousness, experiences unique physical and mental realities, because all experiential realities exist as such only in relation to the awareness that‘s being defined by the impactive boundary or experiential construct which itself exists as the experience of reality. Section 4 Experiential Mechanics III: Positive and Negative Emotional Experiences The unified model of reality that has so far been developed in this work shows how existence as consciousness, through a process of repetitive and progressive self-relation, has evolved into an awareness of physical and mental experiences. However, our experience of reality also contains an emotional component. Therefore, to provide a more complete picture of reality, in this section we will incorporate emotional experience into that model. Emotions seem to exist in complementary pairs, e.g., love/hate, joy/sadness, friendliness/hostility, empathy/antipathy, trust/fear. These emotional pairs each have a positive/negative polarity; that is, one of each pair is considered a positive emotion, and the other is considered a negative emotion. According to the unified model of reality that has so far been developed in this work, emotions, as experiential realities, must represent an awareness of some alteration of the experiential ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 457 construct which defines that awareness. Therefore, in order to integrate emotional experience into the unified model of reality, emotional experience must be explained in terms of some alteration of the experiential construct that also accounts for the existence of the positive/negative emotional polarity. Providing such an explanation is the topic of the following subsections. 4.1 What-is and what-is-not For existence to experience itself, it must exist in relation to itself. Absolute existence can‘t experience itself as such because it‘s nonrelational and nondual, while whatever is experienced must be relational and dual. For existence to experience itself, that process must occur at some relational level of reality, in the realm of relativity, and the experience itself must be of a relative reality, not of an absolute reality. In the realm of relativity, whatever exists does so only in relation to its opposite or complementary relative reality. In the realm of relativity, we can, as existence experiencing itself, experience existence as what-is. However, because any experience of existence as what-is can only be an experience of a relative what-is, not of an absolute what-is, that relative what-is must itself exist in relation to a relative what-is-not. Essentially, in order to have the possibility of experiencing what-is relatively, there must also exist the possibility of experiencing what-isnot relatively. This is the trick of relative existence. Duality means that unreality is also real, that non-existence also exists—not absolutely, but relatively. For there to be any reality, there must be a coexisting unreality. For there to be an existence, there must be a coexisting nonexistence. For there to be a what-is, there must be a coexisting what-is-not. However, we must be clear on the following point: The what-is/what-is-not duality is only relatively real and has no basis of existence outside the context of the experiential relationship. That is, within the context of the experiential level of reality, unreality is real, and nonexistence exists, while outside the context of the experiential level of reality, neither unreality nor nonexistence really exist. As we will show in the following sections, the what-is/what-is-not experiential duality is the basis of the positive/negative emotional polarity. 4.11 The positive and the negative In order to understand how emotional experience comes to exist, we must first understand the basis of the positive/negative emotional polarity. In order to understand the basis of the positive/negative emotional polarity, we must relate the relative concepts of what-is and what-isnot to the terms positive and negative. In photography, the image that‘s first recorded on the film is called a negative. In that negative, relationships become the reverse of what they actually are, so that right becomes left and left ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 458 becomes right. This image is called a negative because it represents the situation as it was not. When the negative recorded on the film is transferred to photographic paper with the proper relationships restored, this image is called a positive because it represents the situation as it was. When making a cast for a sculpture, the form of the cast is called a negative because the cast represents the opposite of what-is, i.e., something where there‘s nothing and nothing where there‘s something. When plaster is poured into the cast, recreating the form of the original reality, this form is then called a positive because it shows what-is as it is, i.e., something where there was something and nothing where there was nothing. Therefore, it seems that the word positive is related to the concept of what-is and that the word negative is related to the concept of what-is-not. These relationships can be seen to be intrinsic to the words themselves when the words are conceptually deconstructed, or broken down into their constituent concepts. Positive = posit + -ive; posit (Latin) = place, -ive = live = being. Thus, the word positive can be translated literally as ―the place of being‖ or ―the place that is.‖ Negative = negate + -ive; negate = not, -ive = live = being. Thus, the word negative can be translated literally as ―not being,‖ or ―that which is not.‖ We will now provide further evidence that the word positive refers to what-is relatively and that the word negative refers to what-is-not relatively by analyzing the associations between the terms positive and good and between the terms negative and bad. 4.12 Projection and reflection, the good and the bad With regard to emotional experience, there‘s a consistent association between the terms positive and good and between the terms negative and bad—i.e., positive emotions make us ―feel good,‖ while negative emotions make us ―feel bad.‖ By analyzing the words good and bad within the context of these associations, we can gain a deeper understanding of the difference between what-is relatively and what-is-not relatively. The association of the terms positive and good indicates that the word good is connected to the relative state of what-is. Likewise, the association of the terms negative and bad indicates that the word bad is connected to the relative state of what-is-not. The word good is very much like the word god, for very good reasons. The word bad is associated with the word evil, which is the reverse or mirror image of the word live, also for very good reasons. God is the archetype of the ultimate good, the ultimate positive, the ultimate whatis. The devil, or ―d(efined)-evil,‖ is the archetype of the ultimate bad, the ultimate negative, the ultimate what-is-not. It‘s been said that the universe was made in the image of God, or of the ultimate what-is. What we need to understand is that there are two types of images, projected and reflected. Projected images, though inverted, maintain the relationships intrinsic to the original reality, whereas reflected images reverse those relationships. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 459 For example, if an image of you with a ring on your right hand is projected through a lens, your image will be inverted or upside down, but the ring will still appear on the right hand of your image. Conversely, if an image of you with a ring on your right hand is reflected in a mirror, your image will be upright, but the ring will appear on the left hand of your image. Thus, in a projected image, the relationships intrinsic to the original reality are inverted but maintained as what they are, while in a reflected image, the relationships intrinsic to the original reality are reversed, or what they‘re not. The word good represents a projected image, a reality that‘s what-is. The word bad represents a reflected image, a reality that‘s what-is-not. The word go/od has a structure that‘s like the image projected through a lens, becoming inverted. The word ba/ad has a structure that‘s more like the image reflected in a mirror, becoming reversed. In go/od, the projected reality, ―-od,‖ is the inverted image of ―go-.‖ In ba/ad, the reflected reality, ―-ad,‖ is the reversed image of ―ba-.‖ In this way, the structure of the word bad itself is related to the unreality or what-is-not-ness of a reflected reality, while, conversely, the structure of the word good itself is related to the reality or what-is-ness of a projected reality. The positive is good because it projects absolute existence as what-is relatively. The negative is bad or evil because it reflects absolute existence as what-is-not relatively. Yet there exists no absolute evil, nor any absolute good, because the state of absolute existence precludes any duality, such as the what-is/what-is-not experiential duality. Yet it‘s also true that we exist in a relative state, in an arena of relativity and relationality, and so we‘re bound, while operating in that state, by the polarity intrinsic to the good/bad duality, and by the association of good with what-is and the association of bad with what-is-not. In summary, the difference between positive and negative, between good and bad, between whatis relatively and what-is-not relatively, is analogous to the difference between a projected image and a reflected image. Projection yields an image that shows an accurate representation of the relationships intrinsic to the original reality, making the projected image an image of what-is as it is. Reflection yields an image that shows an inaccurate representation of the relationships intrinsic to the original reality, making the reflected image an image of what-is as it isn‘t. Before we can relate the experiences of what-is and what-is-not to positive and negative emotions, we must first relate emotional experience to an alteration of the experiential construct, with the awareness of that alteration existing as emotional experience. 4.2 The alteration of the experiential construct that is emotional experience As explained previously, experience occurs when differentiated existence impacts itself, creating an experiential boundary that defines and delimits consciousness as awareness. Previously, we said that what awareness experiences is an alteration of the experiential boundary which defines the awareness. Specifically, this way of describing experience was used to explain our awareness of physical and mental experiences. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 460 Although physical, mental, and emotional experiences are all different, they‘re also all experiences, and in that way they‘re all the same. Therefore, emotions as experiences must also be the result of some alteration of the experiential construct that defines awareness. Yet, since emotional experience is fundamentally different from physical and mental experiences, it must represent a different type of alteration of the experiential construct. In order to approach the nature of emotional experience, we will first look at the differences between emotional experience and physical and mental experiences. Physical and mental experiences both have form, although, for reasons explained earlier, the form of physical experience is tangible, while the form of mental experience is intangible. Emotional experience, on the other hand, has no form whatsoever. This difference provides the first clue to the nature of the alteration of the experiential construct that exists as emotional experience. Physical and mental experiences represent an awareness of alterations of the external and internal experiential constructs, respectively. Physical and mental experiences represent alterations of the shape or form of the experiential construct. On the other hand, emotional experience has no form, and so it must represent some alteration of the experiential construct that doesn‘t involve an alteration of the shape or form of the experiential construct. An alteration of a boundary that doesn‘t involve altering its form is an alteration of the area defined by that boundary—i.e., either an expansion or a contraction of the boundary. Emotions come in complementary positive/negative pairs, and expansion and contraction represent complementary changes in an experiential construct. Therefore, it‘s reasonable to postulate that the awareness of one of these alterations of an experiential construct corresponds to a positive emotional experience, while the awareness of the other alteration corresponds to a negative emotional experience. In other words, emotional experience represents an awareness of the expansion and contraction of an experiential construct, as depicted in figure 91. surrounding whereness focal whereness surrounding whereness expansion of focal whereness surrounding whereness contraction focal of focal whereness Figure 91 Changes in the size of a boundary, either expansion or contraction, don‘t involve changes in the shape or form of that boundary. Rather, expansion and contraction of a boundary involve changes in the area defined by that boundary. There are two basic types of change that can occur to an experiential construct. First, an experiential construct can change in shape by being impacted, creating an awareness of experiential form, i.e., the tangible form of physical reality or the intangible form of mental ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 461 reality. Second, an experiential construct can change in size, by either expanding or contracting, creating the awareness of a formless emotional experience. The question still remains, which alteration of an experiential construct, i.e., either expansion or contraction, corresponds to which type of emotional experience, i.e., either positive or negative? Furthermore, what‘s the nature of the experiential construct that expands or contracts to create the awareness of emotional experience? Further still, what causes an experiential construct to expand or contract? In order to answer these questions, we must return to the previous discussion regarding the correlation of what-is and what-is-not with projected and reflected images, respectively. 4.3 Experiential optics: the projection and reflection of awareness On the basis of the relationships discussed previously, the alteration of an experiential construct that represents a positive emotion should correspond to an experience of what-is, and since whatis corresponds to a projected image, positive emotions should, then, also be related to projected images. Conversely, the alteration of an experiential construct that represents a negative emotion should correspond to an experience of what-is-not, and since what-is-not corresponds to a reflected image, negative emotions should, then, also be related to reflected images. We have postulated that positive and negative emotions represent an awareness of the expansion and contraction, respectively, of an experiential construct. If an impact upon an experiential construct is viewed as a lens through which awareness can experience either a projected reality or a reflected reality, it becomes possible to see the relationships between the expansion and contraction of an experiential construct and positive and negative emotions, as depicted in figure 92. positive emotion awareness experiential (impactive) interaction projected awareness/ experience focal point of awareness distal to the experiential lens experiential lens awareness awareness focal point of awareness proximal to the experiential lens imaged construct reflected awareness/ experience negative emotion Figure 92 The expansion and contraction of an experiential construct corresponds to the awareness of projected and reflected images, respectively. The awareness of projected ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 462 and reflected images corresponds to the experience of positive and negative emotions, respectively. Expanded and contracted experiential constructs can arise if an impact upon an experiential construct is viewed as a lens, allowing the awareness of either a projected or a reflected image-experience. When the impact occurs, awareness experiences the form of the experiential construct as physical or mental reality. Awareness can also use the experiential relationship as a lens either to become aware of a projected image of the experience or to become aware of a reflected image of the experience. The experiential construct that defines awareness‘ experience of either a projected or a reflected reality is neither the external nor the internal experiential construct but is a virtual experiential construct, an imagined experiential construct—i.e., it‘s literally an experiential construct that exists as an image in-to which awareness moves through the lens of either physical or mental experience. This virtual or imagined experiential construct will be referred to as the imaged construct. (Top) The nature of projections is such that the imaged construct which defines awareness‘ experience of a projected reality is larger than the experiential construct which defines awareness from where it‘s projecting itself. Thus, the imaged construct produced as a projected image-experience represents a relative expansion of the experiential construct that defines awareness. (Bottom) Conversely, the nature of reflections is such that the imaged construct which defines awareness‘ experience of a reflected reality is smaller than the experiential construct which defines awareness from where it‘s reflecting itself. Thus, the imaged construct produced as a reflected image-experience represents a relative contraction of the experiential construct that defines the awareness. It doesn‘t matter that these expanded and contracted experiential constructs are only virtual, or imagined, because, for awareness, reality is how awareness is defined, and how awareness is defined is what awareness experiences as reality. That is, for awareness, the imaged construct is as experientially real as the external and internal experiential constructs, inasmuch as the imaged construct also defines awareness, although it does so in another way. In the case of these expanded and contracted imaged constructs, the way they redefine awareness exists as awareness‘ experience of positive (expanded) and negative (contracted) emotional realities. Emotions are thus what awareness experiences as the result of its movement into one of these two types of imaged construct. Essentially, emotions are what awareness experiences as it‘s either projected or reflected through an experiential lens. These projections and reflections of awareness create an emotional experience because, as awareness is projected or reflected, it becomes redefined by an imaged construct. For awareness, experience is what defines it as awareness, and so, as awareness is redefined by this imaged construct, it becomes aware of another type of experience—i.e., emotional experience. Emotions are literally e-motions, or existential motions, being the experiences that result from the movement of awareness (i.e., relative existence) into either a projected or a reflected reality, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 463 either an image of what-is or an image of what-is-not. Emotions represent a movement of awareness from one relative experiential state into another. Through an experiential lens, awareness can move from what-is into what-is-not, from what-is into a relatively expanded whatis, from what-is-not into a relatively contracted what-is-not, or from what-is-not into what-is. Since existence can move into either what-is (projection) or what-is-not (reflection), there exists a positive/negative emotional polarity. That is, if awareness moves into a projected reality, it‘s moving into an image of what-is, and so its experience as a result of that movement is a positive emotion—i.e., literally a movement of existence into what-is. Conversely, if awareness moves into a reflected reality, it‘s moving into an image of what-is-not, and so its experience as a result of that movement is a negative emotion—i.e., literally a movement of existence into what-is-not. In other words, a positive emotional experience exists as the redefinition of awareness within the context of a projective and, therefore, relatively expanded imaged construct, while a negative emotional experience exists as the redefinition of awareness within the context of a reflective and, therefore, relatively contracted imaged construct. How is it that the impactive experiential relationship can function as a lens for the projection or reflection of awareness? We have described experience as the awareness of an impact upon an experiential construct. All experience is a form of self-relation, of existence existing in relation to itself. While the experiential construct functions as a boundary or dividing line between what exists here and what exists there, what exists here and what exists there are actually inseparable. The experiential construct is, in this way, a transparent boundary. As the external and internal experiential constructs function as transparent boundaries between relative realities, alterations in the surface contours of those boundaries exist as physical and mental experiences, respectively, and also create a curvature of those transparent boundaries—i.e., a lens—that awareness can use as either a projective or reflective surface. To understand how the experiential relationship functions as a lens allowing a projected or reflected emotional experience, look at a magnifying glass, or any lens. First, focus upon the lens itself, and what you see is a miniature reflection of yourself, a reduced image of yourself as you‘re not. This reduced image of what-is-not corresponds to the negative emotional experience that results from the movement of awareness into a reflected reality, where the awareness becomes redefined by a relatively contracted imaged construct. Next, focus past the lens, and what you see is a magnified projection of reality, an enlarged image of reality as it is, in which the relationships are maintained as they are, albeit enlarged. This enlarged image of what-is corresponds to the positive emotional experience that results from the movement of awareness into a projected reality, where the awareness becomes redefined by a relatively expanded imaged construct. The relational matrix, which provides the underlying framework for experience, has a duality between spatial construct (form) and spatial content, as well as between spatial structure and dynamic. The construct (form) of the relational matrix is relatively stable, while its content is dynamic. Experiences also have a duality between construct (form) and content, as well as between structure and dynamic. Physical and mental experiences represent the form, the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 464 structural aspect, of experience; emotional experience represents the content, the dynamic aspect, of experience. While the form of an experience is relatively stable, the emotional content associated with that form is variable or dynamic. While an impact upon the external or internal experiential construct creates the form of a physical or mental experience, respectively, the shape or form of that impact also functions as a lens through which awareness can either project or reflect itself, redefining itself in terms of what-is or what-is-not, respectively, resulting in a positive or negative emotional experience becoming associated with the form of the physical or mental experience. Positive emotions make us feel good because they represent an experience of what-is. Saying that we ―feel good‖ is the same as saying that we ―feel what-is,‖ which can also be translated to mean that our awareness has come into contact with what-is. Our awareness comes into contact with what-is by moving into a projected experiential sphere, and it‘s aware of that movement as a positive emotional experience. Conversely, negative emotions make us feel bad because they represent an experience of whatis-not. Saying that we ―feel bad‖ is the same as saying that we ―feel what-is-not,‖ which can also be translated to mean that our awareness has come into contact with what-is-not. Our awareness comes come into contact with what-is-not by moving into a reflected experiential sphere, and it‘s aware of that movement as a negative emotional experience. The form of a physical or mental experience is invariant, for it reflects the structure of the experiential relationship, as determined by the nature of the two relative realities impactively interacting. On the other hand, the emotional character or content associated with physical and mental experiential forms is dynamic, for it‘s determined by whether the experiential lens corresponding to the physical or mental experience is used by awareness as a projective or reflective surface. If the experiential lens is used as a projective surface, the awareness of the physical or mental form occurs within the context of awareness moving into what-is, and thus becomes associated with a positive emotional experience. Conversely, if the experiential lens is used as a reflective surface, the awareness of the physical or mental form occurs within the context of awareness moving into what-is-not, and thus becomes associated with a negative emotional experience. Note that the movement of awareness into either of these emotional spheres is mutually exclusive. That is, if awareness uses the experiential lens as a reflective surface, it can‘t simultaneously use it as a projective surface, and vice versa. What we‘re saying here is that we‘re responsible, to some degree, for the character of the emotional experience associated with our physical and mental experiences. Between the physical or mental experience of the interaction, and our emotional experience of the interaction, there seems to be a ―choice‖ as to how we will relate to the physical or mental experience, since the experiential lens provides two possible imaged constructs, two mutually exclusive experiential spheres into which awareness can move. At this time, we aren‘t concerned with how such a choice is made; here, we‘re concerned only with the fact that there are two possible emotional ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 465 directions our awareness can move in any experiential relationship. Figure 93 summarizes the relationships and terms relevant to emotional experience. experiential relationship experiential content-dynamic imaged construct external construct internal construct no form tangible form intangible form physical experience mental experience emotional experience positive projection good expansion what-is experiential form-structure experiential lens negative reflection bad contraction what-is-not Figure 93 The relationships and terms relevant to emotional experience. The terms in this diagram are interrelated both vertically and horizontally: vertically through similarity or likeness and horizontally through complementarity. Vertically, the terms represent different aspects of the same relational pole of a given duality; horizontally, the terms represent complementary aspects of the two relational poles of a given duality. The interaction-relationship that exists as physical and mental experiences can function as a lens. The projection or reflection of awareness through this lens is the basis of emotional experience. In this way, emotional experience can become associated with physical or mental experiences. Physical and mental experiences are in and of themselves neither good nor bad, neither positive nor negative. These terms are associated with those experiences on the basis of the emotional way we relate to experiences. Emotional experience can be said to color physical and mental experiences, for emotions provide experiential content relative to the shape or form of physical and mental experiences. 4.4 Attention ―Ladies and gentleman, please direct your attention toward the front of the airplane.‖ What is it that we‘re moving when we direct our attention? Let‘s say it‘s springtime, and we‘re in a classroom. Our teacher is discussing algebra, and there‘s a squirrel we can see outside the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 466 window, digging up nuts. We want to be outside, we don‘t have much interest in algebra, and so we watch the squirrel. Suddenly, our reverie is disrupted, as the teacher shouts, ―Pay attention!‖ The word attention reveals the situation awareness finds itself in as it‘s presented with different experiences. Attention is a form or aspect of awareness; attention is awareness that‘s focused upon a particular experience. The word attention refers to the fact that we can‘t focus our awareness upon two different experiences simultaneously. This puts our awareness literally under ―a tension‖ as the focus of awareness is drawn or pulled between different experiences, as depicted in figure 94. non dual awareness dual awareness unfocused awareness algebra experience squirrel experience experiential tension vectors or potential attention vectors fuzzy algebra experience focused awareness clear squirrel experience actualized experiential vector Figure 94 ―Attention‖ is the word that refers to the focus of awareness upon a certain experience. As awareness is presented with different experiences, there are two general ways in which awareness can be aware of those experiences. First, awareness can spread itself evenly among the experiences, taking them all in as a whole (left); or, second, awareness can dualize, focusing or ―concentrating‖ upon one experience, while not focusing upon all the other experiences (right). The awareness of each experience represents an experiential tension vector or a potential focus of awareness. When awareness isn‘t focused or concentrated upon any one experience, these experiential tension vectors remain only potential attention vectors (left). When awareness focuses or concentrates upon one experience, actualizing one of the attention vectors (right), its awareness of all other experiences becomes unfocused or nonconcentrated. By focusing upon one experience, awareness intrinsically dualizes into focused and unfocused awareness. Because awareness and experience exist in relation to each other, when awareness dualizes into two types of awareness, experience also dualizes into two types of experience. Thus, in relation to focused awareness, there exists clear experience; and in relation to unfocused awareness, there exists fuzzy or unclear experience. Attention is literally the direction of experiential tension that our awareness focuses at. So, we can focus our awareness on algebra, on the squirrel, or on neither, but not on both at once. Related to the word attention is the word concentrate. To concentrate on an experience means to gather or bring our awareness together to focus upon an experience. Just as the complementary forces of tension and compression are always found working together in physical systems, so too are attention and concentration found working together in experiential systems. Tension is a ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 467 force that pulls apart, and compression is a force that brings together. Attention refers to awareness being pulled or drawn in the direction of some experience, while concentration refers to awareness coming together to focus upon that experience. Focus means a convergence at one point. Focusing our awareness on one experience means a convergence of our awareness toward that experience. Our awareness can focus upon only one experience at a time, or in any given instant. Thus, in terms of the focus of awareness, we can spend or use only one experiential tension vector at a time. Once any experiential vector becomes the one pointing to where our awareness is focusing at, the other experiential vectors can‘t be pointing to where our awareness is focusing at. Thus, the phrase ―pay attention‖ or ―give me your attention‖ is a request for awareness to spend its one attention vector by focusing upon a certain experience. Because experiences occur all around us and we can focus upon only one experience at a time, we can pay our at-tension to only one experience at a time. Thus, our awareness of different experiences isn‘t always equal. Generally, there‘s one experience we have our awareness focused upon, while other experiences are in the background, as the objects of unfocused awareness. For this reason, although we‘re continuously aware of both focused and unfocused experiences, the quality of the awareness of these different experiences isn‘t equal or the same. Like in a photograph, where the object in focus is sharp and the background is blurred, when awareness focuses upon one experience, that experience is clear, and the rest of the field of experience is unclear or out of focus. 4.41 Attention and the experiential lens When awareness focuses upon a physical or mental experience, that experience then has the potential to function as an experiential lens, thereby providing awareness with an emotional experience associated with the form of the physical or mental experience. Not all experience has an emotional component. First, we don‘t pay attention to all of our experiences. Second, even if we do pay attention to an experience, this doesn‘t always result in the movement of our awareness into a projected or reflected image of the experience. In order for an experience to have an emotional component, two things must happen. First, awareness must focus on or pay attention to the experience. Second, awareness must then, within the context of that focus, use the experience as a lens, as a vehicle for moving into either a projected or a reflected image of the experience, thereby becoming redefined by either a projected or a reflected reality. When awareness uses experience as an experiential lens, awareness becomes redefined by an imaged construct, i.e., either the projected or reflected image of the experience. Whether awareness becomes defined by a projected or a reflected image depends on whether the experiential lens functions as a transparent or opaque surface—i.e., as a window or as a mirror. Although the experiential lens is by nature transparent, as previously described, whether or not ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 468 it‘s used as, and so functions as, a transparent surface depends on where awareness is focused or concentrated in relation to that lens—just as when looking at a magnifying glass, if the focus is on or proximal to the surface of the lens, the lens functions as a mirror, while if the focus is beyond or distal to the surface of the lens, the lens functions as a magnifying glass. Likewise, the focus of awareness in relation to the experiential lens determines whether awareness is able to project itself through the experiential lens or is reflected back by the experiential lens, as depicted in figure 92. The focus of awareness in relation to the experiential lens is itself determined by how awareness uses attention to define itself in relation to an experience. If awareness defines itself in relation to the form of the experience in a way that separates it from what‘s being experienced, the experiential lens then functions as an opaque surface. Conversely, if awareness defines itself in relation to the form of the experience in a way that connects it to what‘s being experienced, the experiential lens then functions as a transparent surface. For awareness, reality is whatever it experiences it to be. Awareness, by defining itself as separate from what it‘s experiencing, must then perceive the existence of a barrier between itself and what it‘s experiencing, and that barrier then becomes its operant reality, resulting in the experiential lens functioning as an opaque surface. On the other hand, awareness, by defining itself as connected to what it‘s experiencing, must then perceive the existence of a link between itself and what it‘s experiencing, and that link then becomes its operant reality, resulting in the experiential lens functioning as a transparent surface. Essentially, awareness won‘t try to focus past or move beyond whatever it experiences as a real barrier, any more than a sane individual would try to walk through a wall. Conversely, if awareness perceives a link between itself and what it‘s experiencing, then awareness will see that link as a doorway or window beyond which it can focus and through which it can move. Therefore, awareness that defines itself as connected to what it‘s experiencing is able to focus beyond itself. In focusing beyond itself, awareness is then able to use the experiential lens as a transparent surface for projecting itself into a what-is imaged construct. As a consequence, awareness experiences positive emotions in association with those experiences it defines itself as connected to. Conversely, awareness that defines itself as separate from what it‘s experiencing is unable to focus beyond itself. In being unable to focus beyond itself, awareness is then unable to use the experiential lens as a transparent surface, in which case the experiential lens then functions as an opaque surface, or mirror. In this case, awareness is then reflected by the experiential lens into a what-is-not imaged construct. As a consequence, awareness experiences negative emotions in association with those experiences it defines itself as separate from. In other words, awareness will tend to have a negative emotional experience in association with experiential forms it conceives or perceives as being separate from itself. Conversely, awareness will tend to have a positive emotional experience in association with experiential forms it conceives or perceives as being connected to itself. Again, we see, just as was the case in the formation of wave and particle experiences, the nature of experiential reality—in this case, the positive or negative emotional reality—doesn‘t exist ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 469 independent of the role awareness plays in forming the interactive relationship that‘s experience. That is, the nature of experiential reality doesn‘t exist independent of the nature or state of awareness, because awareness itself is always part of the interactive relationship that‘s experience. In the sections that follow, we will examine how our emotional experience of reality is affected and, in large part, determined by how our awareness defines itself. 4.42 Emotional growth and atrophy Emotional experience isn‘t automatic; it requires that awareness commit itself to move into an experiential image. Emotional experience requires that awareness allow itself to be redefined by an imaged construct. Awareness can expand or contract emotionally, as it becomes redefined within the context of an expanded, projected experience of reality or a contracted, reflected experience of reality. Emotional growth involves an expansion of awareness, as it becomes redefined within the enlarged context of what-is; emotional atrophy involves a contraction of awareness, as it becomes redefined within the reduced context of what-is-not. Thus, emotional growth is associated with positive emotions, and emotional atrophy is associated with negative emotions. Note that a negative emotion, such as grief over the loss of a loved one, while representing a relative contraction of awareness, can lead to emotional growth if that negative emotion eventually leads awareness to redefine itself in a more connected way, in a positive way, such as by developing empathy for others in difficult situations. Conversely, a positive emotion, such as the happiness or pride that goes along with success in some endeavor, while representing a relative expansion of awareness, can lead to emotional atrophy if that positive emotion eventually leads awareness to redefine itself in a more separate way, in a negative way, such as by developing a sense of superiority. In order to clarify and illustrate the overall experiential mechanism that we‘ve just described, let‘s examine an experiential encounter in detail. Let‘s say we‘re standing in a crowd. Our awareness may or may not be paying attention to any of the people around us. Now, we direct our attention at the people one by one. Eventually, our attention falls upon a person we define as being of another race or class. Now, rather than just paying attention to that person, our experience of that person becomes an experiential lens, creating an emotional experience associated with our visual physical experience of the person. Whether we have a positive or a negative emotional experience associated with that person depends on how we define ourself in relation to them. If we define ourself in relation to the person in terms of some connection, some underlying unity, such as that we‘re both human beings or that we‘re both fans of the same football team, then we have, in effect, by defining ourself as being connected to them, established a bond, a link, between what exists where we are and what exists where they are. This connection then allows our awareness to move, through the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 470 experiential lens, beyond its current definition of itself, thereby redefining itself in a more expansive way. In this case, the experiential lens functions transparently, as a lens, projecting our awareness into an expanded image of what-is. As a result of our awareness being redefined by this projective imaged construct, we become aware of a positive emotional experience associated with the person, e.g., love, trust, or friendliness. On the other hand, if we define ourself in relation to the person in terms of some separation, some divisive polarity, such as superior/inferior, good/bad, etc., then we have, in effect, established a barrier, a wall, between what exists where we are and what exists where they are. This barrier then prevents our awareness from moving, through the experiential lens, beyond its current definition of itself. Instead, awareness becomes redefined in a more contracted way. In this case, the experiential lens functions opaquely, as a mirror, reflecting our awareness back into a contracted image of what-is-not. As a result of our awareness being redefined by this reflective imaged construct, we become aware of a negative emotional experience associated with the person, e.g., hate, fear, or hostility. One experience represents emotional growth, a redefinition of awareness within an expanded imaged construct; the other experience represents emotional atrophy, a redefinition of awareness within a contracted imaged construct. Emotional growth requires that awareness commit itself to move beyond its current experiential boundaries. In the case of emotional growth, awareness is able to let go of its previous definition of itself so that it may create a new self-definition, a new experiential relationship with existence. Emotional atrophy occurs when awareness is unable to move beyond its current experiential boundaries. In this case, emotional movement still results in a redefinition of awareness; however, this redefinition occurs within the context of the old self-definition, the old boundary, and simply represents a contracted form of its previous definition of itself. Thus, over time, some people grow emotionally, while others atrophy emotionally. Some people mellow with age, while others embitter with age. Some people see the world in terms of connection, while others see the world in terms of separation. Some people move into an everexpanding what-is, while others move into an ever-contracting what-is-not, and others just move back and forth between the two. The more awareness becomes redefined within the context of what-is, the more awareness experiences ―feeling good‖ (or feeling good about itself), because it literally exists in contact with what-is. Conversely, the more awareness becomes redefined within the context of what-isnot, the more awareness experiences ―feeling bad‖ (or feeling bad about itself), because it literally exists in contact with what-is-not. Whether our awareness undergoes emotional growth or atrophy, whether we feel good or bad about ourselves, depends greatly on how our awareness defines itself. For this reason, after the next subsection, we will analyze the factors involved in awareness‘ definition of itself. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 4.5 471 “What’s love got to do with it?” Having discussed emotional experience as the movement of awareness into either a projective or a reflective imaged construct, we will now examine the basis of that movement in more detail. For existence to exist in relation to itself, it must polarize or dualize. This polarization or dualization requires some force, some unfathomable effort of existence—an act of creation. To get from here to there, a force must be applied. For existence to move from an absolute to a relative state, a force must also be applied. This force is the mother of all forces, for it‘s the primary movement. In absolute existence, there‘s no-thing, no force, no movement, just what-is. Relative existence is created and sustained by this underlying force of polarization or dualization. This primary act of creation is the primary force, the primary movement, from which all other forces and movements extend as derivations. From where we are now, existing in this relative state of awareness, this primary act of creation that extends from the absolute state is unfathomable. Yet, because we‘re not ultimately other than absolute existence, because we‘re inseparable from what-is, because this force supports our relative existence, this force must also exists within our relative experiential existence, within experiential reality. We experience this primary force, this primary movement of existence, this primary act of creation, as the emotion we call love. We need to define our use of the term love as a force within this context, for we speak of many different types of love. When we use the term love, we‘re speaking of unconditional love, love that‘s outwardly radiating without limits, without self-concern, without needing any love in return for it to continue to radiate. This love is the love of a mother for her child, the love of the creator for its creation, for relative existence as child is the manifestation of this radiating love of absolute existence as mother. The mother wants the child to love her, but even if the child doesn‘t, the mother‘s love is unchanged, for it‘s unconditional. We, as humans, are capable of radiating the same love as that which got us here in the first place, because ultimately we are that. We‘re both creator and created, both mother and child, in the same instant. We‘re in the process of becoming, and we‘re also where what‘s becoming is coming from. We‘re what exists absolutely, unchanging; and at the same time, we‘re also what exists relatively, constantly changing within the dimensions of space and time, within the arena of relational structure and dynamic. Love is the force that‘s responsible for turning an absolute singularity into a relative duality, as that unfathomable force is ―experienced‖ from our relational perspective. Love is the force that creates mutually sustaining relationships between relative existences, at all relational levels of reality, both universal and individual. Love is the force that sustains all individual relationships between relative existences, as well as the universal relationship between relative and absolute existence. Because our relative existences and individual relationships are inseparable extensions ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 472 of absolute existence and the universal relationship, this primary force is operant and existent throughout all relational levels of reality, as depicted in figure 95. what-is absolutely positive spatial content husband what-is mother relative to man this yang unconditional love what-is yin woman relative to child this wife negative spatial content Figure 95 The force of unconditional love as that which drives the primary movement of singular or absolute existence into dualized or relative existence. Unconditional love is a dualizing force, not a dividing force. Love creates dualized or relative realities, realities that are mutually coexistent and fundamentally inseparable, and thus indivisible. When existence dualizes, it doesn‘t divide; it only forms a relationship with itself. That primary relationship is created and sustained by the force we experience as unconditional love. The individual relationships between all relative existences at all relational levels of reality are ultimately maintained or sustained by this primary force of love. In becoming relative existence, absolute existence doesn‘t really go anywhere, for relative existence exists within it. Thus, the movement that the force of unconditional love induces is intrinsic to absolute existence; it‘s not a movement from here to there, as we normally think of movement, but a movement from singularity to duality, from absolute existence to relative existence. Love dualizes existence, and since relative existences are mutually coexistent and thus inseparable, love creates and sustains mutually coexistent relationships between mutually coexistent realities. Love is the force driving the ongoing extension of absolute existence into relative existence. This primary force of love is itself an aspect of absolute existence, as all things must be, for there‘s nothing else. Love is what-is, but it‘s what-is in motion, in the act of creation, in the process of becoming, in the state of experiencing itself. Love, as the primary movement of absolute existence into relative existence, is the primary e-motion, the primary existential motion, the primary force underlying the evolution of existence into experience.14 This primary movement, this primary emotion, has no opposite, no complement, for it‘s what exists absolutely in the process of becoming what exists relatively. That‘s why this love is 14 It’s no coincidence that the word evolve is very close in structure to the word love held up to a mirror, i.e., “evolove.” This similarity occurs because evolution is fundamentally a process of love, evolution being fundamentally existence in the process of repetitively and progressively forming relationships with itself, as that process is physically, mentally, and emotionally experienced. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 473 unconditional, existing without any conditions on its existence, as opposed to relative existence, which requires as a condition the co-existence of a complementary reality. Essentially, this love is absolute because this love is absolute existence in motion, on its way to becoming relative existence. Unconditional love, the primary emotion, the primary existential motion, precedes all duality, for it‘s itself the cause or force underlying all duality or relative existence. This unconditional love can‘t be experienced, for it exists prior to the duality necessary for the self-relationship that‘s experience. While we can‘t experience this nondual force of unconditional love, we can be it, for this love is what we are in the process of becoming what we will be. When we feel this force of absolute love flowing through us, we in that instant transcend the duality intrinsic to experience, and in that instant we are conscious of being and becoming, rather than aware of doing and dividing. However, such a transcendent existential state isn‘t where most of us spend much, if any, of our time, and so we will dwell upon it no further for now. As awareness, as a localization of consciousness existing in relation to itself, we can occupy a state of awareness of either what-is or what-is-not. Where most of us spend most of our time is either moving between the relative states of what-is and what-is-not, moving from what-is to a relatively expanded what-is, or moving from what-is-not to a relatively contracted what-is-not. In this way, we experience different positive and negative emotions, feeling either good or bad about what we experience as reality, as depicted in figure 96. what-is absolutely unconditional love (absolute existence becoming relative existence) what-is relatively love joy friendliness empathy trust what-is-not relatively (existential motion) e-motion hate sadness hostility antipathy fear Figure 96 The same movement that drives absolute existence into relative existence becomes experienced as an emotion (literally, the existential motion into a relative state of experience), when that movement occurs within and between relative realities. From ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 474 the top to the bottom of the diagram, the movement of absolute existence into relative existence is depicted. From side to side at the bottom of the diagram, the movement within and between relative states of experience is depicted. Unconditional love as a force, as an impeller of existential motion, is the foundation of all other emotions, both positive and negative. Unconditional love is a singular force, but from this love arises the what-is/what-is-not experiential duality, and so from this love arises the existence of both positive and negative emotions. Unconditional love is existence coming to exist in relation to itself, or existence forming a relationship with itself. Once this self-relationship exists, the relative states of positive and negative emotional experience can exist as further movements of absolute existence into relative existence. Essentially, unconditional love is the movement of absolute existence into relative existence, the movement of consciousness into awareness. We always remain what we ultimately are, yet we can experience both what we relatively are and what we relatively are not, because experience occurs within the arena of relativity, where what-is and what-is-not coexist as relative realities, and so always exist as such only in relation to each other. As awareness, as relative existence, we‘re bound to be always in existential motion, for ultimately we‘re what exists absolutely becoming what exists relatively. Relative existence is existence in motion; relative existence is intrinsically dynamic. This description applies to the relational structure of space, as well as to the relational nature of awareness. The question is, with regard to what we experience as that existential motion—i.e., as e-motion—is which relative state of experience are we moving into, what-is or what-is-not? Movement into what-is results in the awareness of a positive emotional experience, whereas movement into what-is-not results in the awareness of a negative emotional experience. The most vital question with regard to the quality of our emotional experiences is, what causes our awareness, our relative existence, to move into one relative state of experience rather than another? We will address this question in upcoming sections. Conceptual checkpoint II-5 -The nature of experience is such that it‘s possible for awareness to experience both what-is and what-is-not. -Both what-is and what-is-not are relative realities. -Every physical and mental experience has the potential to also act as a lens through which awareness can either project or reflect itself. -Emotions are what awareness experiences as it moves through the experiential lens into either what-is or what-is-not. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 475 -What-is is relatively positive, or ―the place that is,‖ because a positive emotion is a projection of what exists, and in a projection an accurate representation of the relationships intrinsic to the original reality is maintained. -What-is-not is relatively negative, or ―that which is not,‖ because a negative emotion is a reflection of what exists, and in a reflection an inaccurate representation of the relationships intrinsic to the original reality is created. -The movement of awareness into what-is corresponds to a positive emotional experience and results in awareness being redefined by a relatively expanded, projective imaged construct. The movement of awareness into what-is-not corresponds to a negative emotional experience and results in awareness being redefined by a relatively contracted, reflective imaged construct. Section 5 The Dimension of Experience What‘s a dimension? It‘s most simply a place to be, a place to exist within, a someplace existence can occupy. We build a house, and it has certain dimensions, and these dimensions provide us with a place to be. We add a room onto the house, and we‘ve added a new dimension to the house; we now have a new place to be. Experience works in pretty much the same way, only at a more fundamental level, where the dimensions that are created are the dimensions of reality, and the dimension of experience is occupied by awareness itself. Consciousness exists everywhere and thus nowhere. Consciousness, through a process of successive dualization, creates within itself the relational matrix. The relational matrix provides consciousness with a place to be, a place to exist within, someplace it can occupy. In this respect, consciousness, while experiencing itself within the relational matrix, is some-where and is thus a-where (i.e., aware). Consciousness existing as awareness is defined by experience, and so the place that consciousness as awareness occupies is the dimension of experience. Consciousness, as it exists within the experience-house it has erected, then becomes awareness. The reality for consciousness as awareness is the experience-room it exists within. Consciousness is never other than what it is, yet as it comes to exist within the dimension of experience, consciousness as awareness can experience itself as anything, as whatever it defines itself to be, since that self-definition depends on how the dimension of experience is constructed. Let‘s say that we‘re standing on a mountaintop and can see all around, fully conscious of our surroundings. While we stand there, someone builds a house around us. Now, what we see as we look around are the walls of that house. We haven‘t moved or gone anywhere, yet our reality has changed from one of unlimited vision to one of limited vision, from consciousness to the awareness of experience, as a new dimension was constructed around us. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 476 This is essentially what consciousness does to itself as it becomes the awareness of experience. Consciousness doesn‘t really go anywhere or become other than what it already is; consciousness simply erects walls of self-definition around itself, thereby creating different experiential places it can exist within as awareness. This dimension of experience is real, but it‘s only relatively real, not absolutely real. From within the house of experience, the mountaintop reality can be obscured. Within the house of experience, the rooms can seem to be all there is. Yet experience isn‘t all there is; experience actually extends from a more fundamental level of existence. Without the mountaintop there cab be no house, yet without the house, the mountaintop still remains what it is. Beyond experience, the more fundamental level of existence from which experience extends always remains intact. That more fundamental level of existence usually is, but need not be, obscured by the walls of self-definition in the house of experience. In this section, we will examine experience as a dimension, as someplace existence can occupy. What we will describe is how consciousness constructs walls of self-definition around itself, thereby becoming obscured from itself. By examining experience as a dimension, we will come to understand how consciousness as awareness can become lost while wandering about the house of experience it has built around itself. For it‘s through understanding how consciousness as awareness can become lost that we can then understand how consciousness as awareness can come to find itself again. 5.1 Projected and reflected states of being; Good moods and bad moods The most vital question with regard to the overall quality of our emotional experiences is whether our awareness is defined by the dimension of what-is or the dimension of what-is-not. The what-is or what-is-not nature of our emotional experiences provides the context for all our physical and mental experiences. Once awareness has moved into an emotional dimension of experience, the nature of that dimension colors the form of all physical and mental experiences. Let‘s say that we experience something physically, or think of something mentally, and this experience puts us in a bad mood. Now, what this means is that we paid attention to the experience and our awareness moved toward the experience, using it as a lens. This movement toward the physical or mental experience creates an emotional experience, for it results in our awareness becoming defined by an imaged construct. Whether our awareness moves into a projected or a reflected dimension depends on how we define ourself in relation to the experience. In this case, we defined ourself as separate from the experience, causing the experiential lens to function as a mirror, reflecting our awareness into the dimension of what-isnot. As a consequence, we experience a negative emotion in association with the experience. However, the negative emotion we experience in association with the experience doesn‘t stop with the association to just that one experience. Once our awareness has become defined within the dimension of what-is-not, that negative emotion provides the context for all other experiences. As long as we‘re using the first experience to reflect our awareness into the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 477 dimension of what-is-not, all other experiences occur within the context of what-is-not, in association with a negative emotional experience. This is called being in a ―bad mood,‖ which is literally the movement of awareness in the direction of a negative experiential reality. 15 Thus, while in a bad mood, we become unable to appreciate good things, good experiences, because we don‘t see them as such, because we see them from within the dimension of what-isnot. While in a bad mood, someone can tell us what should be good news, and we‘ll say, ―So what?‖ We may see a beautiful picture and not be moved to feel a positive emotion. Other experiences can‘t make us feel good as long as we‘re locked into feeling bad. Other experiences can‘t move us into what-is as long as we‘re moving into what-is-not. That is, as long as our attention is focused upon an experience that has us reflecting our awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, we can‘t simultaneously pay attention to an experience that would have us project our awareness into the dimension of what-is. To move toward one dimension, we have to move away from the other. As long as awareness‘ attention is focused upon the experience through which awareness is reflecting itself into the dimension of what-is-not, awareness remains stuck in a bad mood—i.e., awareness is bound to move in the direction of a negative experiential reality. In order to get out of this bad mood, either awareness must stop focusing upon the experience that‘s acting as a reflective surface, or awareness must change the way it defines itself in relation to the experience, so that the experience can then act as a projective surface, rather than as a reflective surface. Thus, when a father or mother comes home in a bad mood and sees their smiling child, this experience can allow them to move toward what-is, into feeling good, if they can let go of the bad experience, if they can stop paying attention to the experience that has them defined within what-is-not. However, if the parent is unable to let go of the bad experience, if they‘re unable to stop paying attention to the experience that has them defined within what-is-not, then the goodness of the smiling child will be lost to them, and, instead, the child will be experienced as an irritant, colored by the bad mood. As mentioned previously, we can also change our mood by changing the way we define ourself in relation to an experience. That is, we don‘t need to focus our attention upon another experience to change our mood; we can change our mood simply by altering the way the current experience is functioning as an experiential lens. Again, the way an experience functions as a transparent (projective lens) or an opaque (reflective mirror) surface depends on how we define ourself in relation to the experience—i.e., as separate or connected. By changing our relationship to the experience, we change how we‘re emotionally affected by the experience. For example, let‘s say that our boss comes in and yells at us. Perceiving this verbal assault as an attack, we define ourself as separate from the boss within the context of an agonist/antagonist duality. Now, if we pay attention to the experience and use the experience as a lens, then the experience viewed as such will result in our movement into a reflected reality, creating the 15 Literally, mood = direction of movement. Therefore, bad mood = a negative direction of movement = movement into what-is-not, and good mood = a positive direction of movement = movement into what-is. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 478 awareness of a negative emotion in association with the experience, putting us in a bad mood. We may hate the boss, we may get angry at the boss, we may even yell back at the boss. Now, someone comes in and tells us that the boss is having some difficult times at home. We can relate to that, we can connect with that, and within this context we no longer define ourself as separate from the boss. Now, instead of feeling anger toward the boss in association with our experience of their having yelled at us, we may experience a positive emotion (e.g., empathy) in association with that same experience. The connection we make between ourself and the boss allows the experiential lens (i.e., the experience of the boss yelling) to function as a transparent surface, so that, as we focus upon the experience, our awareness becomes defined within the projected context of what-is, rather than within the reflected context of what-is-not. The experience remains what it is; the form of the experience doesn‘t change. However, how the experience affects us emotionally depends on how we define ourself in relation to it. When we fall in love, or find true love, either in another human or within ourself, the world seems brighter because all experience then occurs within the context of what-is. Conversely, if there‘s a breakup, when love is lost, the world seems darker because all experience then occurs within the context of what-is-not. These moods, both good and bad, are to some degree self-perpetuating. Once awareness becomes defined within the context of what-is or what-is-not, this experiential reality then influences how awareness defines itself in relation to further experiences. What-is is connection; what-is-not is separation. That is, existence is ultimately unified, and so connection is an experience that accurately depicts the relationship of existence to itself. Conversely, separation is an experience that inaccurately depicts the relationship of existence to itself. For this reason, once awareness has become defined within the dimension of what-is-not, awareness tends to define itself as separate from what it experiences, and so becomes more prone to experience negative emotions in association with whatever else it experiences. Conversely, once awareness has become defined within the dimension of what-is, awareness tends to define itself as connected to what it experiences, and so becomes more prone to experience positive emotions in association with whatever else it experiences. We keep returning to the importance of how awareness defines itself in relation to experience as determining the what-is or what-is-not (i.e., positive or negative) nature of its emotional reality. For awareness to define itself in relation to an experience, it must first define itself as awareness. In what way does awareness define itself? Definition is an experience, and so awareness‘ definition of itself is awareness‘ experience of itself. What awareness experiences as existence outside itself, as other, is referred to as ―it‖; what awareness experiences as its own existence, as itself, is referred to as ―I.‖ In the next section, we will examine how awareness experiences and so defines itself as ―I.‖ This understanding will provide the context for examining how awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ determines how awareness becomes defined in relation to other experiences, which relationship itself then determines whether awareness experiences a positive or a negative emotion in association with those experiences. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 479 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 5.2 The creation of “I” as awareness’ experience of itself Awareness is the experiencer, the seer, the eye. As the experiencer, awareness can‘t experience itself directly, in the same way that the eye can‘t see itself directly. For the eye to see itself, it must use a mirror. For awareness to experience itself, it must use an experiential lens. What the eye sees as itself as it looks in a mirror isn‘t what the eye is directly; rather, what the eye sees is a reflected image of itself. Likewise, what awareness experiences as itself, as ―I,‖ through an experiential lens isn‘t what awareness is directly; rather, what awareness experiences is either a projected or a reflected image of itself, i.e., ―I‖ as an experience of what-is or ―I‖ as an experience of what-is-not, as depicted in figure 97. reflected “I” experience awareness projected “I” experience reflected experience of “it” awareness (what-is-not) projected experience of “it” experiential lens I reflected experience of “it” reflected experience (awareness experienced as it is not) of “I” projected experience of “I” experiential lens awareness I (what-is) projected experience of “it” (awareness experienced as it is) Figure 97 Awareness can experience itself as ―I‖ within the context of either a reflected or a projected experience, i.e., within either the context of what-is or the context of what-is-not. Awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ represents awareness looking back at itself (i.e., experiencing itself) from either a reflected (left) or projected (right) dimension of experience. In order for awareness to look back at itself, it must first move away from itself. Awareness moves away from itself by moving through the experiential lens into either a projected or reflected experience of ―it,‖ thereby moving into either the dimension of what-is or the dimension of what-is-not, as shown at the top of both diagrams. From either of those positions, awareness is then able to ―look back‖ at where it‘s coming from, and experience itself as ―I.‖ Since awareness can look back at itself from either the dimension of what-is or the dimension of what-is-not, awareness can in this way experience itself either as ―I‖ within the context of what-is or as ―I‖ within the context of what-is-not. In this way, awareness can experience itself either as it is or as it isn‘t. Awareness can experience itself as ―I‖ from the perspective of its own object-experience because that object-experience exists fully within the awareness itself. Everything we experience is part of our awareness; otherwise, we wouldn‘t be aware of it. Awareness can take any position or point of view within its sphere of experience. Once awareness becomes defined by an objectexperience, awareness can then use that dimension of experience as a place from which to experience itself as ―I,‖ as its own object. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 480 ―I‖ as an experiential reality is a relative reality—i.e., it exists as such only in relation to another relative reality. In this case, the relative experiential reality of ―I‖ exists as such only in relation to the relative experiential reality of ―it‖ (both of which exist as such only in relation to awareness itself). What awareness experiences as other is defined as ―it‖; what awareness experiences as itself is defined as ―I.‖ For awareness to experience itself as ―I,‖ awareness must also experience another as ―it,‖ for it‘s from the position of experiencing another as ―it‖ that awareness looks back and experiences itself as ―I‖ experiencing ―it.‖ For this reason, awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ is inseparable from the experience of another as ―it,‖ for ―it‖ provides awareness with the perspective from which it may experience itself as ―I.‖ Awareness and experience exist as such only in relation to each other. Experience can be either of what-is or of what-is-not. The I/it experiential duality arises either within the dimension of what-is or within the dimension of what-is-not. An ―I‖ that‘s what-is can‘t exist in relation to an ―it‖ that‘s what- is-not, for what-is and what-is-not are mutually exclusive dimensions of experience. Awareness can be in only one dimension or the other, not in both simultaneously. If awareness occupies one dimension of experience, then by definition awareness doesn‘t occupy the other. If we‘re in one room, then we aren‘t in another room. If we‘re in a room, then we see everything from the position and perspective of that room. Therefore, if the ―it‖ that awareness experiences as another is an ―it‖ that‘s what-is, then the ―I‖ that awareness experiences as itself, from the perspective of that ―it,‖ will also be an ―I‖ that‘s what-is. Conversely, if the ―it‖ that awareness experiences as another is an ―it‖ that‘s what-is-not, then the ―I‖ that awareness experiences as itself, from the perspective of that ―it,‖ will also be an ―I‖ that‘s what-is-not. This relationship is depicted in figure 97. Since the experience of ―I‖ always occurs in relation to an experience of ―it,‖ the existence of ―I‖ is defined by the existence of ―it.‖ The association of the experience of ―I‖ with an experience of ―it‖ is the process of identification, or the way in which we, as awareness, create an identity (literally, an ―I-defined entity‖). Our identity is, then, our defined image of ourself or ―I‖ as it exists in relation to what we experience as ―it.‖ As an example of the process of identification, we can consider materialism, which is the defining of awareness as ―I‖ in relation to the ―it‖ of material objects or possessions. Materialism, in this sense, is an example of one type of identification. In materialistic identification, the more and the better stuff we perceive ourself to own, the better we feel about ourself experienced as ―I‖ in relation to that stuff. However, one of the problems with materialism, or with identification with any objectexperience, is that there‘s always more and better stuff to be had. So, while awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ may be elevated for a while by the acquisition of some new and better object, eventually there arises an awareness of an even-better ―it‖ out there, or an awareness that there‘s more of ―it‖ out there. Relative to this awareness of the new ―it,‖ the ―it‖ that ―I‖ owns— i.e., the ―it‖ in relation to which awareness experiences itself as ―I‖—now seems lesser in comparison. As a result, awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ in relation to this ―it‖ is also ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 481 lessened, diminished, and thus generally depressed. In order to reelevate its experience of itself as ―I,‖ in order to feel good about itself again, awareness seeks a newer ―it,‖ or more of ‖it.‖ Having acquired this better ―it,‖ awareness now experiences itself as a better ―I‖ in relation to ―it.‖ However, eventually, another, even better ―it‖ comes into view, and the cycle goes on. In this way, materialism, as awareness‘ definition of itself as ―I‖ in relation to object-possessions, creates an endless cycle of desire/satisfaction. As another example of the process of identification, we can look at how sports fans identify with their team. Their ―I‖ is to some degree associated with the team as ―it.‖ They feel good or bad, depending on whether their team wins or loses, because they identify with the team, meaning that their experience of themself as ―I‖ has become somewhat linked to their experience of the team as ―it.‖ If the team wins, they see themselves as a winner, while if the team loses, they see themselves as a loser. In the process of identification, the experiential existence of ―I‖ becomes linked or attached to the experiential existence of some ―it.‖ The concept of attachment is central to Hindu and Buddhist philosophies, which see our association of our defined image of ourself or ―I‖ with experiential reality as one of the primary reasons for our ignorance (i.e., lack of awareness) of our true nature. Since attachment and identification both involve the linkage of ―I‖ to an experiential reality of ―it,‖ we might assume that they‘re two terms describing an identical process. However, attachment and identification aren‘t identical. Attachment is a limiting experience, and so it has a negative connotation or association. Identification is itself neutral, for awareness can identify either with what-is or with what-is-not. Attachment can be seen as one pole of identification, wherein awareness identifies itself with an experience of what-is-not—i.e., attachment as a source of ignorance refers to an awareness‘ experience of itself as an ―I‖ that‘s derived from an experience of an ―it‖ that‘s what-is-not. However, identification can produce not only restriction, not only limitation, but also liberation, if awareness identifies itself with an experience of what-is. What-is is connection, what-is-not is separation. Experience, though self-defining, isn‘t in and of itself restrictive or limiting; i.e., experience as the boundary that defines awareness can function as either a doorway or a wall, providing either passage into what-is or confinement within what-is-not. Identification, as awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ in relation to awareness‘ experience of another as ―it,‖ therefore isn‘t in and of itself restrictive or limiting. Experience is restrictive, i.e., confined by attachment, when awareness‘ experience of itself becomes associated with what-is-not. Experience is liberating, i.e., free from attachment, when awareness‘ experience of itself becomes associated with what-is. In other words, identification with what-is-not is restriction, while identification with what-is is liberation. Awareness, through the experience of either what-is-not or what-is, can move either into further separation or further connection. It may seem paradoxical that feeling separated from the rest of existence is restrictive, while feeling connected to the rest of existence is liberating. To us it may seem that connections are restrictive and that having no connections is liberating. However, this is only because we‘re experiencing connections from within the topsy-turvy dimension of what- ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 482 is-not, where everything appears as the opposite of what it really is. Liberation comes from being what you are; restriction comes from being what you‘re not. No matter what we think reality is, and no matter what we think our relation to that reality is, we can‘t get around the underlying fact that existence is ultimately inseparable from itself. The individual truly becomes free only when they realize that being an individual doesn‘t mean being separate from the rest of existence but means being connected to the rest of existence, as one pole of an indivisible, mutually coexistent duality (literally, individual = ―indivisibly dual‖), as consciousness existing in relation to itself, becoming then existence which is somewhere and existence which is everywhere else. Therefore, identification and ―I‖ aren‘t themselves ―bad‖ things. It all depends on whether the identification is made and the ―I‖ is created in relation to an experience of what-is-not (a negative) or what-is (a positive). This ability that awareness has to create a defined experience of itself is what gives awareness the ability to bind itself within unreal experiential states. The ability of awareness to experience itself as what-is-not (or as what it‘s not) is what allows awareness to confine itself within the dimension of experience, to experience itself as separate from the rest of existence. Conversely, the ability of awareness to experience itself as what-is (or what it is) is what allows awareness to free itself within the dimension of experience, to experience itself as connected to the rest of existence. In this way, experience is a two-edged sword: One edge is used to confine us, and the other is used to free us. To understand what freedom is, we must first understand the predicament of our confinement. Toward that end, we will now explore how awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ within the experiential context of what-is-not creates a self-perpetuating cycle of confusion, resulting in awareness being unable to experience its connection to the rest of existence. For if awareness experiences itself as what it‘s not, then awareness must remain unaware of what it is. 5.3 The trap of misidentification Awareness itself isn‘t ―I.‖ ―I‖ is an experience. ―I‖ is what awareness experiences itself as; ―I‖ is how awareness sees and defines itself; ―I‖ is what awareness considers itself to be. For awareness, reality is whatever it experiences it to be; therefore, whatever form or definition of ―I‖ awareness experiences itself as becomes its reality. For this reason, how awareness defines itself as ―I‖ is of vital importance with regard to how awareness then defines itself in relation to other experiences. In other words, although awareness experiences itself as ―I‖ in relation to another as ―it,‖ the nature of its experience of itself as ―I‖ then determines how it will experience its relationship to other ―its,‖ other experiences—i.e., as separate from or connected to those experiences. This experience of separation or connection, in turn, determines whether the experience functions as a mirror, reflecting awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, or as a lens, projecting awareness into the dimension of what-is. Awareness doesn‘t generally distinguish between what-is and what-is-not. Whatever awareness experiences is its reality, period. Awareness simply recognizes experience as such. Awareness, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 483 while experiencing what-is-not, is unable to appreciate the ultimate unreality of its experience. This is because, as an experience, it‘s real, because the reality of experience is relational, and so the experience of what-is-not is just as real (i.e., just as relatively existent) as the experience of what-is. For awareness, any experience seems to be what-is simply because it exists as an experience. Therefore, when awareness experiences itself as ―I,‖ it considers that ―I‖ to be what it is, regardless of whether that ―I‖ is an experience of what-is or what-is-not. It‘s this inability of awareness to recognize that experience occurring within the context of whatis-not is ultimately unreal, is ultimately an inaccurate representation of how existence relates to itself, which allows awareness to become effectively trapped within the dimension of what-isnot. In this subsection, we will discuss how this trap operates. As awareness, we‘re facets on the diamond that‘s the totality of existence. We‘re in no way separable from the rest of existence, yet most of us are unaware of the depth of our connection to all that exists, unaware of the true relationship of our part to the whole. How does this unawareness occur? How does what‘s inseparable come to be experienced as separate? This experiential separation of our awareness from the rest of existence is the result of awareness‘ having walled itself off from the surrounding reality in an attempt to defend its mistaken notion of ―I,‖ its mistaken experience of what it is. As explained in the previous subsection, how awareness experiences itself as ―I‖ depends on whether its experiencing itself from within the dimension of what-is or from within the dimension of what-is-not. If awareness experiences itself as ―I‖ from within the dimension of what-is-not, then what awareness experiences itself as is really what it‘s not. Once awareness experiences itself as an ―I‖ that‘s not, awareness becomes effectively trapped within this ultimately unreal experience of reality, this experience that has no correlate in existence as it really is. This functional confinement of awareness occurs in the following way. To awareness, this ―I‖ that it experiences itself as is what it is, (even though it‘s really what it‘s not). In becoming aware of itself as this limited experiential ―I,‖ awareness simultaneously becomes unaware of the ultimately unlimited nature of its existence. By identifying its existence with this experience of itself as ―I‖ (as an ―I‖ that‘s really not), it then becomes inevitable that awareness will see any event leading to the dissolution of this ―I‖ as something that causes its own nonexistence. Awareness, in mistaking itself for this ―I‖ that‘s not, logically concludes that if this ―I‖ ceases to be, then awareness itself will also cease to be. For this reason, awareness is bound to defend this self-image, bound to defend its mistaken notion of itself as this limited experiential ―I,‖ in order to maintain what it considers to be its own existence. By becoming aware of its existence within the context of this ―I‖ that‘s really not, awareness becomes unaware of the connection between its relative existence and absolute existence, and so awareness loses sight of the fact that what it really is can never stop existing. Thus, by attaching its existence to this limited and mistaken experience of itself as ―I,‖ awareness is able to conceive of its own nonexistence. In this way, awareness is able to experience fear, fear being the emotional experience of impending doom, or movement toward nonexistence. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 484 Awareness can never really stop existing, for it‘s ultimately absolute existence. But once awareness experiences its reality within the context of what-is-not, the ultimately unreal, the ultimately nonexistent, becomes experientially real and existent. Thus, from within the dimension of what-is-not, the unreality of awareness‘ possible nonexistence becomes real, simply because it‘s an experience. (Again, because all experience is relative, unreality is real, and nonexistence exists, but only at the experiential level of reality, not at the levels of reality that precede experience.) For an awareness that‘s experiencing reality within the dimension of what-is-not, a situation that ultimately doesn‘t and can‘t exist (i.e., its own nonexistence) seems as if it can exist, as if it‘s real. This, in a nutshell, is the conundrum that awareness finds itself in as it experiences reality. Awareness can experience either what-is or what-is-not, but, as experiences, they both seem on their face equally real. So, how is awareness to tell one from the other? How, when faced with an experience, can awareness tell whether it‘s experiencing what-is or what-is-not, since to awareness they‘re both equally experientially real and so appear equally as what-is? Essentially, awareness can determine the nature of an experience according to the type of emotion it feels in association with the experience. If the experience is associated with a positive emotion, then awareness is moving into the dimension of what-is. Conversely, if the experience is associated with a negative emotion, then awareness is moving into the dimension of what-isnot. Fear is a negative emotion. Fear is the movement of awareness into an experience of what-is-not. Existence is what-is; nonexistence is what-is-not. Awareness is aware of its movement toward the experience of nonexistence as the negative emotion of fear. Awareness is able to feel this fear, to move toward the experience of nonexistence, only because it has associated its existence with the limited experiential ―I‖ formed within the dimension of what-is-not (i.e., because it has associated its existence with what-is-not.) In order to try and avoid what awareness perceives as its own possible nonexistence, awareness then defends whatever notion of ―I‖ it has, defends its self-image. That is, rather than overcoming its fear by realizing that it‘s more than what it experiences itself to be as ―I,‖ awareness tries to overcome the fear of perceived nonexistence by buttressing and reinforcing the experience of itself as ―I.‖ This buttressing and reinforcement of an ―I‖ that‘s really not creates a vicious cycle, whereby awareness traps itself within an increasingly dense, fragmented, and ultimately unreal experience of what it is. Awareness is unaware that the source of its fear, the source of its perceived possible nonexistence, lies in its mistaken definition of itself, in the association of its existence with an experience of an ―I‖ that‘s really not. This is the problem with the awareness of experience that occurs from within the dimension of what-is-not: Awareness becomes unable to experience— i.e., becomes unaware of—the actual situation, the situation as it really is. Instead of experiencing the situation as it really is, awareness experiences the situation as it‘s really not. Instead of seeing the source of its perceived possible nonexistence as coming from within itself, as it truly does, awareness instead sees that source as coming from outside itself. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 485 Because awareness sees the source of its possible nonexistence, the threat to its ―I,‖, as coming from outside itself, awareness then tries to defend itself and prevent its own nonexistence by erecting more and more barriers of self-definition between the experience of itself as ―I‖ and the experience of another as ―it.‖ What are these barriers, these walls, that awareness uses to defend and separate itself as ―I‖ from another as ―it‖? They‘re simply awareness‘ progressive definitions of itself as ―I‖ in relation to ―it.‖ Awareness can define itself either as connected to or as separate from what it experiences. By defining itself as an ―I‖ that‘s separate from ―it,‖ awareness then feels as if it has protected itself from ―it‖; awareness then feels as if ―it‖ can‘t get at its ―I,‖ as depicted in figure 98. buildup of awareness’ Layers of self-definition (ego) I exist I am alive I am human it I am a man I am white I am wealthy etc. I the eye increasingly narrow selfdefinition it increasing I-definition increasing I-isolation it Figure 98 Layer upon layer of self-definition progressively walls off awareness, experienced as ―I,‖ from the surrounding reality, experienced as ―it.‖ When awareness experiences itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not, awareness mistakenly thinks that this experience of ―I‖ is what it really is. Once awareness mistakes ―I‖ for what it is, awareness then becomes bound to defend the existence of this ―I‖ in order to avoid what it perceives as threats to its existence coming from ―it.‖ Awareness defends itself as ―I‖ from ―it‖ by experientially walling ―I‖ off from ―it.‖ Awareness experientially walls ―I‖ off from ―it‖ by progressively defining ―I‖ in relation to ―it.‖ Defend and define are two words that indicate the same function, the erection of a barrier. Thus, defending the existence of ―I‖ means the erection of defining barriers around ―I.‖ Those barriers of self-definition exist as terms that awareness uses to separate ―I‖ from ―it.‖ Each new barrier, each new definition, while further separating ―I‖ from ―it,‖ also creates another way for the existence of ―I‖ to be threatened, thereby ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 486 necessitating the erection of yet another barrier to help support the previous one. In this way, awareness, mistakenly functioning as ―I,‖ becomes progressively defined and confined within an increasingly narrow self-definition, and so awareness ends up trapping itself in its attempts to protect itself. Ego is a term that‘s closely related to ―I.‖ Whereas ―I‖ represents awareness‘ experience of itself, the ego represents the totality of the structure of self-definitions which define that ―I.‖ Ego is, then, the composite structure by which ―I‖ is defined as awareness‘ experience of itself. Saying that the ego feels threatened is the same as saying that awareness‘ definition of itself is in some way threatened. When awareness feels that the ego is threatened, it either responds aggressively toward, or runs from, that threat in order to protect what it perceives to be its existence, as that existence has been defined as ―I‖ by the ego structure.* However, what awareness doesn‘t realize, what it‘s unaware of, is that these very barriers of selfdefinition which it erects between its experience of itself as ―I‖ and its experience of the surrounding reality as ―it‖ are themselves the ultimate source of its fear, the ultimate source of its experience of possible nonexistence. These barriers of self-definition erected between ―I‖ and ―it‖ are the ultimate source of awareness‘ fear of nonexistence because awareness uses them as boundaries to separate itself from what it experiences.* These boundaries separating ―I‖ from ―it‖ then establish an experiential framework, a cage, that tends to keep awareness moving into a reflected reality, into the dimension of what-is-not, into an experience of reality where both ―I‖ and ―it‖ are what-is-not. The deeper awareness moves into what-is-not, the more ―I‖ becomes defined and experienced as it‘s really not. This situation creates more ways awareness is able to experience itself as possibly not existing. Remember, awareness is able to experience its own possible nonexistence only because it has mistakenly associated its existence with its experience of itself as an ―I‖ that‘s what-is-not. By mistakenly linking its existence to a relative and limited experiential reality, awareness becomes bound to defend its experience of itself as ―I‖ in order to protect and maintain what it perceives as its very existence. Thus, the erection by awareness of barriers of self-definition around ―I‖ in order to defend its experience of itself as ―I‖ from its experience of * For example, the concept and existence of homosexuality poses a threat to an ego structure that rigidly defines the awareness in question—i.e., the “I”—in terms of strict and polarized male-female dominance-submission relationships. An awareness defined as such is often unable to tolerate the concept of homosexuality, since such a concept runs counter to the concepts by which awareness’ existence, experienced as “I,” has been defined. Therefore, such an awareness often responds to homosexuality aggressively, attempting to eliminate it as a reflexive way of protecting what it mistakenly perceives as its own existence. As another example, in racism, an awareness has defined itself as “I” in terms of strict and polarized us/them superior-inferior relationships. Thus, racists are unable to tolerate concepts of racial equality because such concepts exist in opposition to the concepts by which their existence, experienced as “I,” has been defined. Therefore, such an awareness often responds to symbols of racial equality aggressively, attempting to eliminate them as a reflexive way of protecting what it mistakenly perceives as its own existence. This dynamic functions in the same way for any concept or object that is seen as existing in opposition to the concepts by which “I” is defined. Conversely, concepts and objects that are perceived to reinforce the ego-structure are treated with the opposite of aggression, i.e., with empathy and understanding. * As explained in a previous subsection, whether or not awareness moves into the dimension of what-is or into the dimension of what-is-not depends on whether or not the experiential lens functions as a mirror or as a transparent surface. When awareness defines itself as separate from what it’s experiencing, that experience, when used as an experiential lens, reflects awareness into the dimension of what-is-not. Conversely, when awareness defines itself as connected to what it’s experiencing, that experience, when used as an experiential lens, projects awareness into the dimension of what-is. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 487 another as ―it‖ both sustains and propagates a vicious cycle of increasing self-division, isolation, and fear. To better understand how this cycle functions, an analogy will be useful. Let‘s say you live in a field surrounded by no walls. You roam the field freely without fear. One day, you see what you think is a poisonous snake. This snake, seen as poisonous, is a threat to your existence—i.e., ―it‖ is seen as being capable of causing the nonexistence of ―I.‖ As a consequence, you fear the snake, as your experience of the snake becomes associated with the perceived nonexistence of your experience of yourself as ―I.‖ So, you build a wall around yourself to separate and protect yourself from the snake. The wall works very well at keeping the snake separate from you, and so it assuages your fear, but it also works to keep you from the rest of the field. Now, within the area of the field you‘ve enclosed, resources appear limited. You now see yourself as being in competition for those resources with other creatures within the enclosure. If they eat too much, you won‘t have enough, and you‘ll starve and die. These creatures are now seen as being capable of causing the nonexistence of ―I.‖ So, you fear the creatures, as your experience of the creatures as ―its‖ becomes associated with the perceived nonexistence of your experience of yourself as ―I.‖ So, you capture them and wall them off behind a second, more internally situated barrier. This barrier works very well at keeping these other creatures from the food the field has to offer, and so it assuages your fear, but it also confines you to an evensmaller section of the field. Now, within the even-smaller area of the field you‘ve enclosed, resources appear even more limited. Now, you see yourself as being in competition for those resources with other people within the enclosure. If they use too many of the resources, you won‘t have enough, and you‘ll starve and die. These people are now seen as being capable of causing the nonexistence of ―I.‖ So, you fear the people, as your experience of the people as ―them‖ (i.e., the human form of ―it‖) becomes associated with the perceived nonexistence of your experience of yourself as ―I.‖ These people are seen as threatening your existence, and so you attack them and try to kill them first or drive them from the field. Eventually, you drive them from the best part of the field and then build another, more internally situated wall to keep them from getting back in. This barrier works very well at keeping these people from getting back into the best part of the field, and so it assuages your fear, but it also confines you to an even-smaller section of the field. And on and on it goes….. Each wall, each boundary, each barrier of self-definition, while protecting you from one perceived threat, also creates the possibility and inevitability of another way your existence defined as such can be threatened, thereby necessitating the construction of yet another protective barrier. Each time we build a wall to separate us from what we fear, in building that wall, we change the environment, the conceptual landscape, redefining our ―I‖ in relation to ―it.‖ This alteration of the environment always creates a new threat, a new fear. People think, if they have a lot of money, they‘ll be happy, that this money will be like a wall keeping away what they fear. Then they get the money, and they assuage their old fears, but now they fear losing the money. So, one ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 488 fear is replaced by another. Once we build a wall to separate ourself from what we fear, we must work to maintain that wall. Walls don‘t eliminate fear; they only mask it, only put another face on it. The walls we build can never separate us from the real enemy, for our real enemy, the actual source of our fear, always lies within. This is because the actual source of our fear isn‘t in the ―it‖ that we wall ourselves off from; rather, the actual source of our fear is within ourself, in the experience of ourself as an ―I‖ that‘s really not, in the way we experience our own existence as awareness from within the dimension of what-is-not. The actual source of our fear isn‘t the ―it‖ that seems to threaten us; the actual source of our fear is our misapprehension that this ―I‖ is what we really are. No matter how sturdy and numerous the walls we build to separate ourselves from the threatening ―it,‖ as long as we defend our mistaken notion of ―I‖ we‘re bound to fear, we‘re bound to experience ways in which we can cease to exist, we‘re bound to experience threats to what we mistakenly perceive as our existence. We will all die, but we will never cease to exist; we will never cease to be what we ultimately are. In the final analysis we‘re just trying to hide from ourself (although we‘re unaware of this, since we think we‘re trying to hide from ―it‖). So we can run, but we can‘t hide, for wherever we go, there we are, clinging to our mistaken notion of what we are. It‘s sort of like smelling a really bad odor, and so we keep trying to get away from it, to distance ourself from it, not realizing that the odor is emanating from ourself. The more we try to keep the odor out by building walls around ourself, the stronger and more noticeable it becomes in the more enclosed area. Likewise, the more walls we build around our ―I,‖ the more concentrated, intense, and inescapable our fear becomes. In this way, awareness becomes increasingly confined in a mistaken experience of itself as ―I.‖ The more barriers of self-definition awareness erects around ―I,‖ the more unaware it becomes of what it really is. The more unaware awareness becomes of what it really is, the realer its experience of itself as ―I‖ becomes, increasing the apparent need it feels to defend this mistaken notion of itself as ―I,‖ this self-image. We will call this process of self-confinement the cycle of self-ignorance, since it‘s a cycle that perpetuates awareness‘ unawareness of what it is, as depicted in figure 99. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience awareness‘ reflected experience of itself as ―I‖ in relation to a reflected experience of ―it‖ Awareness, within the context of considering itself to be ―I,‖ perceives a threat to ―I‖‘s existence from ―it.‖ This leads awareness to..... 489 awareness it I Layers of self-definition represent ego structure and are maintained by the experience of self as ―I‖ a ....further definition and separation of ―I‖ in relation to ―it,‖ leading back to.... it it b d ongoing result it c ... erect another barrier of selfdefinition to protect ―I‖ from the threat of nonexistence associated with ―it.‖ This leads to...... Increasingly constricted experience of self as “I” Figure 99 Awareness‘ experience of itself as an ―I‖ that‘s really not within the dimension of what-is-not creates a self-perpetuating cycle that precludes awareness from experiencing itself as it is. Since this cycle keeps awareness unaware of what it really is, and thus unaware of its connection to the rest of existence, it‘s referred to as the cycle of self-ignorance. The cycle is set into motion by the event depicted at the top of the diagram (a), wherein awareness uses the experiential lens as a mirror and so experiences itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not. Next (b), awareness, mistakenly considering itself to be its experience of itself as ―I,‖ perceives a threat to the existence of ―I‖ from some experience of ―it.‖ Next (c), in order to protect ―I‖ from this threatening ―it,‖ awareness erects a boundary, a new definition of itself as ―I‖ in relation to this ―it,‖ in order to separate itself from this ―it.‖ This new boundary then reinforces awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I,‖ since now awareness is doubly defined as a mistaken ―I‖ (d), which then leads back again to the situation depicted in (b), where awareness, with this modified definition of itself as ―I,‖ perceives a new threat to its existence as ―I‖ is now defined. This leads again to the situation depicted in (c), which leads to (d), then back again to (b), and on and on. With each cycle, another barrier of self-definition is added, leading ultimately to the situation depicted on the right (also depicted in figure 98), where awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ becomes progressively restricted by ever-narrower self-definitions. These barriers of self definition serve to separate awareness from the rest of existence, from the rest of consciousness. The link between all these barriers of self definition is ―I‖; they‘re all held together by awareness‘ mistaken experience of itself as ―I.‖ With each new barrier of selfdefinition, ―I‖ becomes more confined. Furthermore, owing to the increasing inability of awareness to experience the surrounding reality beyond these self-imposed limits, awareness is unaware that it‘s ―I‖ which is holding all these walls in place. As long as awareness considers this ―I‖ to be what it is, then the walls remain in place; and as long as the walls remain in place, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 490 awareness is bound to experience ―I‖ as what it is, and also is bound to erect more walls to protect and maintain this experience of ―I‖ it mistakenly considers itself to be. Physical reality has its dangers, but the point here is that our actual existence as consciousness can never really be in any danger of not existing. Therefore, the barriers of self-definition that awareness erects between what it experiences as itself and what it experiences as another in order to protect its notion of ―I‖ are walls erected to protect awareness from a danger and an outcome that don‘t and can‘t actually exist. ―I‖ as an experience can and will cease to exist, but awareness isn‘t ―I‖; awareness is what-is, albeit what-is existing in relation to itself. Although the threat of nonexistence isn‘t ultimately real, the walls, the boundaries, the barriers of self-definition, do have an impact upon the way awareness experiences its existence, and so do have an impact upon the quality of our emotional experience as long as we‘re functioning as an awareness within the universe of relative existence. Because we‘re aware, our experience is real. For this reason, the walls we use to define and defend ―I,‖ though conceptual, though experiential, nonetheless function as real, even though the danger they protect us from is ultimately unreal. As long as the danger seems real, any wall which awareness uses to separate itself from that danger also functions as real. The thing is, these barriers of self-definition don‘t separate us from any real danger; all they do is create an experiential framework that separates us from an experience and an awareness of what we really are. Now, it could be said that any experience of awareness as ―I‖ is mistaken, is confining, since awareness isn‘t experience. However, there‘s a difference between awareness experiencing and defining itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is, and awareness experiencing and defining itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not. Awareness experiencing and defining itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is is aware of connection and so can experience itself and remain aware of its true relationship to the rest of existence, whereas awareness experiencing and defining itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not is aware of separation and so is unable to experience its true relationship to the rest of existence and instead experiences that relationship as it‘s not. Awareness experiencing itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is remains aware that ―I‖ is an experience and not what it really is. Awareness experiencing itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is doesn‘t become attached to ―I,‖ doesn‘t identify with this experience of ―I.‖ ―I‖ is simply seen to be an experience like any other, as a relative reality, not as an absolute reality. Just as we can see a magic show and enjoy the experience but not be drawn into the illusion, into the unreality of the apparent experiential reality, so it‘s also possible for awareness to experience reality as what-is and so remain aware of the actual relationship of itself to existence, and of experience to existence, and not be drawn into the separating and self-limiting illusion of whatis-not. The experience of what-is is liberating, as awareness that experiences what-is becomes defined by an ever-expanding boundary of relative existence. Conversely, the experience of what-is-not is confining, as awareness that experiences what-is-not becomes defined by an ever-contracting boundary of relative existence. So, the problem for awareness isn‘t in the existence of ―I‖ as an ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 491 experience but in the existence of ―I‖ as it‘s experienced within the separating and self-limiting dimension of what-is-not. At some point, awareness experiencing itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not feels limited and confined by the increasingly dense barriers of self-definition. At that point, awareness may decide that it would like to get rid of some of these barriers. So, awareness makes an effort to get out of the cage it has erected around its experience of itself—i.e., awareness tries to extract itself as ―I‖ from the cage it now feels itself to be trapped in. What awareness doesn‘t realize is that ―I,‖ as an experience of what-is-not, is itself the bolt which holds together the cage that awareness finds so limiting and confining. Thus, the more awareness tries to get ―I‖ out of its cage, the more this effort just reinforces the mistaken notion that ―I‖ is what awareness really is, and so the more this effort reinforces the barriers of self-definition that awareness is trying to get rid of. No matter where awareness goes, no matter what experience awareness tries to use to escape, to get ―I‖ out of its cage, so long as awareness maintains its mistaken notion of itself as ―I,‖ awareness simply winds up trapping itself in the same way within a different experiential framework. In this way, awareness is put in the paradoxical position of defending and maintaining the existence of the cage it‘s trying to get out of. Efforts to get out of the cage as ―I‖ only make the cage more real and thus more inescapable. The limitation that awareness imposes upon itself as a result of its experience of itself as an ―I‖ that‘s not, functions to make awareness unaware of what it really is, thus leaving awareness with the experience of itself as a separate ―I,‖ as opposed to being inseparable from the rest of existence. Once awareness has entered the dimension of what-is-not, unreality becomes its reality. In this way, the limitation awareness imposes upon itself through the mistaken notion of itself as ―I‖ becomes self-sustaining, as well as self-perpetuating. To get beyond the walls, to get free of its self-limitations, to get ―I‖ out of its cage, to escape from its trap, awareness must let go of its mistaken notion of itself as ―I.‖ Once the ―I‖ is seen to be unreal, the barriers that define that ―I,‖ the bars of the cage that are bolted together with that ―I,‖ themselves are seen to be unreal and so are no longer defended and maintained. The problem is, as has just been described and as is depicted in figure 99, the mistaken notion of ―I‖ is selfsustaining and self-perpetuating once awareness has experienced itself as this ultimately unreal ―I.‖ Any attempt to get ―I‖ out of its cage only makes the bars of the cage stronger. The bars define ―I,‖ and ―I‖ bolts the bars of the cage in place. The more awareness struggles to get ―I‖ out, the sturdier and realer the cage becomes, because in struggling to get ―I‖ out, what awareness unknowingly does is strengthen the relative reality of the ―I‖ bolt that holds the bars of the cage together. Even if awareness stops struggling, the cage still may not go away if awareness stopped struggling with the intention of making the cage go away so that ―I‖ could be free. For this intention itself is an action that reinforces the existence of ―I,‖ though passively. The only way for awareness to get beyond the confining barriers of self-definition once the cycle of self-ignorance has been entered is for awareness to become aware of the nature of its ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 492 dilemma, to become aware that it‘s its own jailer. Once awareness realizes this, it stops struggling with no effort, with no intention, simply because the absurdity of continuing to do so has finally become clear. In this way, the cycle of self-ignorance is broken. The problem is, once again, how is awareness supposed to become aware of its dilemma, to escape from the trap it has gotten itself into, and so exit the cycle of self-ignorance, if the dilemma by its very nature precludes awareness from being aware of what it‘s doing to itself? It seems that existence has played quite a nice trick upon itself. It‘s as if existence says to awareness: ―Here, awareness, go ahead and experience what-is-not. Sure, you can get back again. You can always get out of what-is-not by seeing that what you experience isn‘t ultimately real. But, oh, by the way, as long as you‘re experiencing what-is-not, what you experience will appear to be ultimately real. Ha ha ha….‖ It seems to be the perfect double bind, a very sticky wicket indeed, or more like a Chinese finger trap. You can get in quite easily, but once you‘re in, the harder you try to get out, the tighter the trap becomes. Awareness‘ wandering into the dimension of what-is-not is also like Alice going through the looking glass, where everything appears as the opposite of what it really is, everything works backward, everything is ―topsy-turvy,‖ turned upside down, reversed. Like the Red Queen who runs faster and faster just to stay in the same place, the harder awareness tries to get out, the more it stays right where it is, i.e., in the topsy-turvy land of what-is-not. Conversely, once awareness stops trying to go anywhere, it‘s then able to move from where it is. But again, the problem is, as long as awareness is experiencing reality from within the topsy-turvy land of what-is-not, awareness is impelled to keep trying to do something to change its position, which then only keeps it trapped where it is. Yet there must be some way for awareness to get out of this dilemma, some way to exit the cycle of self-ignorance, or else awareness would remain forever lost to itself, spiraling farther and farther into the dimension of what-is-not. Fortunately, no force is without its complementary counterforce. As the cycle of self-ignorance drives awareness farther into the dimension of whatis-not, the result of movement in that direction causes another experience to become predominant, an experience that eventually serves to counter to some degree the deepening descent of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not. We will now explore the nature of this complementary counterforce by examining the pleasure/pain experiential duality. 5.4 Pleasure and pain Awareness is defined by emotional experience as existing within either the dimension of what-is or the dimension of what-is-not. An emotional experience that defines awareness within the dimension of what-is is positive, while an emotional experience that defines awareness within the dimension of what is-not is negative. What-is is connection; what-is-not is separation. The universe consists of existence repetitively and progressively existing in relation to itself. Existence in this relational state is in no way ultimately separable from itself. Therefore, the experience of existential connection or unity— ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 493 i.e., the awareness of existence as inseparable from itself—is an accurate representation of the actual relationship existence has with itself. Conversely, the experience of existential separation—i.e., the awareness of existence as somehow separable from itself—is an inaccurate representation of the actual relationship existence has with itself.* In the previous subsection, we described how awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not leads to an experience of increasing existential separation. We also touched upon how awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is leads to an experience of increasing existential connection. To quickly review, the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not causes awareness to experience itself as an ―I‖ that‘s really not, leading awareness to define itself within a contracting barrier of self-definition, an exclusive experiential boundary, thereby progressively separating itself experientially from the rest of existence. Conversely, the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is causes awareness to experience itself as an ―I‖ that really is, leading awareness to define itself within an expanding barrier of self-definition, an inclusive experiential boundary, one that takes into account relatively more of existence, thereby progressively connecting itself experientially with the rest of existence—even within the confining context of a barrier of self-definition. Therefore, for these reasons, another aspect of the movement of awareness into the dimensions of what-is and what-is-not is the experience of increasing existential connection associated with movement into the dimension of what-is, and the experience of increasing existential separation associated with movement into the dimension of what is-not. In this subsection, we will make the case that the experience of increasing existential connection which accompanies awareness‘ movement into the dimension of what-is is what we call pleasure, while the experience of increasing existential separation which accompanies awareness‘ movement into the dimension of what-is-not is what we call pain. To begin our analysis, we will examine the words themselves, for the words pleasure and pain each indicate the relational states that awareness finds itself in as it becomes, respectively, experientially either connected to or separated from the rest of existence. The word pleasure represents the state of existential connection that awareness experiences as pleasant: ―Pleasure‖ = ―please-sure,‖ a complementary relationship between asking and giving, which are mutually coexistent and mutually supportive movements. Thus, the form of the word pleasure indicates a relational structure wherein existence is aware of its connection to itself while existing in relation to itself, dualized but undivided, with the relative existences of experiencer and experienced seen as they are, as mutually coexistent. * What existence actually is lies beyond experience. However, the experience of what-is, as a projected reality, maintains the relationships intrinsic to the original, while the experience of what-is-not, as a reflected reality, reverses the relationships intrinsic to the original. For this reason, although neither the experience of what-is nor the experience of what-is-not is what exists directly, the one accurately displays existence’s relationship to itself, and the other inaccurately displays that relationship. One displays that relationship as connection, while the other displays that same relationship as separation. Neither is what exists directly, but one is certainly closer to it than the other. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 494 When the experiential boundary functions as a lens, projecting awareness into the dimension of what-is, awareness as ―I‖ feels connected to what it experiences as ―it,‖ as well as to the rest of existence. Awareness experiences this state of existential connection as what we call pleasure. The experience says to awareness, ―Please come in,‖ and awareness says, ―sure,‖ and so awareness is projected through the experiential lens into the dimension of what-is, and in the process experiences please-sure, which is simply the awareness of a connection between itself as the experiencer and the experienced reality. Pleasure is, then, most fundamentally what awareness experiences as the state of its being connected to another relative existence. The word pain represents the state of existential separation that awareness experiences as unpleasant: ―Pain‖ = ―pane‖ (as in window pane or pane of glass) = a barrier = separation. Pain is awareness‘ experience of its isolation or apparent separation from some aspect of existence that awareness actually exists in relation to. Since what awareness exists in relation to is actually part of its larger existence, the apparent separation of awareness from what it exists in relation to is another way of saying awareness‘ separation from itself, or self-division. The experience of pain isn‘t the awareness of an ultimately or absolutely real separation, since this is impossible. However, pain does represent the awareness of an experientially real separation. That is, to the awareness that experiences the separation, the separation is real, and so the pain, the self-division, is real because for awareness, reality is whatever it experiences it to be. When the experiential boundary functions as a mirror, reflecting awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, awareness as ―I‖ feels separate from what it experiences as ―it,‖ as well as from the rest of existence. Awareness experiences this state of existential separation as what we call pain. In this case, the experience says to awareness, ―Please come in,‖ and awareness says, ―no‖ and so awareness is reflected off the experiential lens into the dimension of what-is-not, and in the process experiences pain, which is simply the awareness of a separation between itself as the experiencer and the experienced reality. Pain is, then, most fundamentally what awareness experiences as the state of its being separated from another relative existence. Pain is an experience of what-is-not, because pain is awareness‘ experience of separation from what it‘s truly inseparable from. Pleasure is an experience of what-is, because pleasure is awareness‘ experience of connection to what it actually exists in relation to. Because pleasure involves movement into the dimension of what-is, it‘s a positive emotional experience. Because pain involves movement into the dimension of what-is-not, it‘s a negative emotional experience. Pleasure projects the state of existential connection or unity and the awareness of mutual coexistence, while pain reflects the state of existential separation or self-division, where the awareness of mutual coexistence is lost. Unity is what-is; division is what-is-not. Our greatest physical pleasure comes during sex (literally ―self-extension‖ or ―self-expansion‖), when we exist in connection to another, in unity with another, in harmony with another. We are drawn to the orgasmic state because at that moment we physically experience the underlying unity of what-is. Our greatest physical pain comes when some part of our body is destroyed, i.e., when some part of our physical being becomes separated or divided from the rest. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 495 Our greatest mental pleasure comes when we‘re able to see relationships, to form connections between different ideas, to understand something as part of a greater whole. Our greatest mental pain comes when we can‘t figure something out, when we can‘t make the connections between this idea and that idea, when we can‘t see where something fits. Our greatest emotional pleasure comes when we reunite with a loved one, and our greatest emotional pain comes when we lose or are separated from a loved one. Thus, there‘s a consistent association between pleasure and the experience of existential connection, and between pain and the experience of existential separation. However, painful experiences can also lead to a greater positive emotion, and pleasurable experiences can lead to a greater negative emotion. For instance, the pain of surgery can lead to the pleasure of better health, and the pleasure of sex can lead to the pain of a broken relationship. Analyzing an individual experience as either pleasurable or painful, then, depends on the larger context within which it‘s occurring. That is, there can be unselfish pleasure and selfish pain, and there can be unselfish pain and selfish pleasure. Unselfish pleasure is positive all the way around, because it occurs within the larger context of an awareness of existential connection or unity. Selfish pain is negative all the way around, because it occurs within the larger context of an awareness of existential separation or self- division. On the other hand, unselfish pain, while involving some apparent separation of existence from itself, takes place within the larger context of an awareness of existential connection or unity and so is ultimately positive, representing the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is. Conversely, selfish pleasure, while involving some apparent connection of existence to itself, occurs within the larger context of an awareness of existential separation or self-division and so is ultimately negative, representing the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-isnot. An example of unselfish pain might be giving something you really like to someone who needs it more than you do. Parting with whatever you‘re giving away is somewhat painful, but in the end it feels good. (However, it only works this way if you‘re really giving it away without attachment, without expecting anything else in return. For if you give something away expecting something in return, even just a good feeling, then you‘re not really giving it away but rather are selling it.) An example of selfish pleasure might be cheating on your lover or spouse, whatever the case may be. The experience of sex may be pleasurable, but in the end it creates greater pain for those involved. The lover or spouse either finds out about it, causing both them and yourself pain, or you manage to keep it hidden, in which case the maintenance of this secret requires that you build a wall between yourself and your lover, creating an unseen rift that creates problems and pain for the duration of the relationship. As awareness‘ what we are is existence existing in relation to itself and so inseparable from itself. Thus, it‘s our nature to be connected to the rest of existence rather than to be separated ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 496 from the rest of existence. For this reason, it‘s our nature to seek pleasure and avoid pain, since pleasure represents the experience of existential connection, while pain represents the experience of existential separation. The increasing isolation we experience as our awareness progressively defines itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not is unnatural, inasmuch as it represents an experiential state that‘s really contrary to our nature. How is it that awareness can do something which isn‘t in its nature to do? That is, if it‘s the nature of awareness to be connected to the rest of existence, why does awareness move in the direction of disconnection and existential separation? Again, awareness considers whatever it experiences to be reality, i.e., to be what-is. Thus, awareness moves into the dimension of whatis-not, into self-division, because it doesn‘t recognize that it‘s experiencing what-is-not, because it thinks it‘s experiencing what-is. Once what-is-not has been mistaken for what-is, the nature of awareness to be connected to what-is, to seek what-is, is turned on itself, taking awareness deeper into what-is-not. In this way, awareness is moved by its nature in a way that‘s actually against its nature. However, as awareness moves deeper into the dimension of what-is-not, it increasingly experiences pain and negative emotions (or angst). While the experiences within the dimension of what-is-not seem to be real, to be what-is, they also seem to bring more pain than pleasure. This pain provides awareness with a clue that it may not be going in the right direction, toward what-is, and that things may not be as they seem. The pain we‘re speaking of here isn‘t just the prick of a needle or a bump on the head, although these pains do cause us to change our physical patterns of movement. The pain that causes awareness to reevaluate the overall direction of its movement is the deep emotional distress, the anxiety, that seems to come from nowhere but that actually comes from awareness‘ experience of increasing existential separation from the rest of existence, as awareness experiences the walls, the panes, that it has erected within itself, between its mistaken experience of itself as an ―I‖ that‘s really not and the rest of existence as ―it,‖ as awareness mistakenly moved deeper into the dimension of what-is-not. So, while awareness may experience what-is-not as real, the underlying unreality or what-is-notness of these experiences eventually asserts itself in the form of pain and negative emotions. What-is and what-is-not may be equivalent in terms of their experiential reality, but they aren‘t the same experience. When awareness moves into the dimension of what-is-not it finds itself in a different place than when it moves into the dimension of what-is. Again, relative realities may be coexistent, but they‘re still different. Pain and negative emotions, because they‘re unnatural—i.e., because they don‘t exist according to the way existence is actually structured—do provide some resistance to the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not. Awareness, experiencing itself as an ―I‖ that‘s really not, confined and limited by multiplying barriers of self-definition, begins to experience an increasing amount of pain as the manifestation of its increasing isolation from the rest of existence. At some point, the unnaturalness of the pain, of the increasing isolation, becomes great ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 497 enough to act as a force resisting awareness‘ further movement into the dimension of what-isnot. Eventually, the increasing pain and negative emotions resulting from awareness‘ further movement into the dimension of what-is-not causes awareness to reevaluate its sense of direction. ―Perhaps this isn‘t where ‗I‘ really want to be. Perhaps this isn‘t really the direction ‗I‘ want to go. Perhaps ‗I‘ isn‘t what ‗I‘ really am.‖ At this point, awareness starts trying to escape from what-is-not but finds it very difficult to do so, owing to the cycle of self-ignorance it‘s trapped within, as explained in the previous subsection. Remember, any attempt by awareness to extract ―I‖ from this situation only reinforces the mistaken notion that ―I‖ is what awareness really is. If awareness‘ further movement into the dimension of what-is-not causes pain, causes an apparent separation of existence from itself, how or why is it that awareness goes there in the first place? Why does a child touch a hot stove even though they‘ve been warned that it will hurt? Because they want to experience it for themselves. Why does awareness move into the dimension of what-is-not, setting in motion the cycle of self-ignorance? Because, like the child, awareness wants to experience what-is-not for itself. In the early stages of awareness‘ movement into the dimension of what-is-not, awareness still is relatively more connected to than separate from the rest of existence, and so there‘s little pain or negative emotion associated with that movement. The novelty of the experience of what-is-not outweighs the pain and negative emotions associated with that experience. Similarly, putting your hand on a hot surface might not cause intense pain immediately; in fact, the novelty of the warmth might even feel good, but the longer the hand is held there, the worse the pain gets. Likewise, awareness in the early stages of its movement into the dimension of what-is-not is so fascinated with the form of this new experience that it doesn‘t pay attention to the pain and negative emotions which accompany that experience—like a person who sees something in a forest, goes walking toward it, and becomes so fascinated by what they see that they pay no attention to the bushes and briars which are poking and scratching them along the way. Likewise, as long as awareness is able to ignore the pain, it can continue relatively unimpeded into the dimension of what-is-not. However, as awareness moves deeper into the forest of what-is-not, the balance between fascination and pain shifts, as the underbrush becomes denser, as the barriers of self-definition multiply. At this point, the pain and negative emotions caused by any movement deeper into the forest of what-is-not begin to outweigh the fascination that awareness has with this new experience. At some point, the pain and negative emotions accompanying further movement into the forest of what-is-not become so great that awareness can‘t help but pay attention to it, as pain and negative emotions start to become the predominant experiences. It‘s at this point that the experience of pain and negative emotions is able to act as a force countering to some degree the impetus toward movement into the dimension of what-is-not that‘s provided by the cycle of selfignorance. It‘s at this point that the pain and negative emotions caused by awareness‘ movement into the dimension of what-is-not literally force awareness to stop and pay attention to where it‘s going. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 498 However, while getting into the forest of what-is-not was fairly easy, getting out is another matter. Once awareness moves deep enough into the forest of what-is-not, the way out can‘t be seen, and movement in any direction seems only to cause more pain. In trying to get out of the forest of what-is-not, awareness often becomes only more and more lost. 5.41 Karma It‘s impossible to escape the what-is or what-is-not nature of the experiential context within which all our actions occur. That is, if an action is born of an awareness of existential separation, regardless of whether the action appears on its surface to cause pleasure or pain, it will eventually and inevitably produce a negative or painful experience. Conversely, if an action is born of an awareness of existential connection, regardless of whether the action appears on its surface to cause pleasure or pain, it will eventually and inevitably produce a positive or pleasurable experience. You may be able to fool others around you, and even yourself, regarding your deepest motives, but you can‘t avoid the mechanics of experience—i.e., you can‘t fool Mother Nature. For example, punishing a child for misbehavior may cause pain to both the parent and the child, but if it‘s done within the larger context of existential connection, of love, then the end result will be a more positive and pleasurable relationship between the parent and child. Conversely, not punishing a child for misbehavior, owing to parental guilt or out of fear of alienating the child, may in the short term be quite pleasing to the parent and the child, for it avoids conflict, but the end result will be a more negative and painful relationship between the parent and child. We exist in the ocean of experiential existence, and every move we make creates a wave within that ocean. Movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is creates a wave that propagates as what-is; movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not creates a wave that propagates as what-is-not. Every wave we create eventually returns to us in the form in which it was created, and then impacts our awareness as either a pleasurable or a painful experience, i.e., as either what-is or what-is-not. We‘re thus bound to experience the results of our actions. This is what‘s known as the law of karma. Jesus of Nazareth had this to say about karma: ―As ye sow, so shall ye reap.‖ Karma is experiential feedback. Karma is a function of the way experiential waves propagate within the interconnected and unified underlying framework of relative existence. What is an experiential wave? Every action we take, every move we make, creates an impact on the rest of existence. When the rest of existence then impacts our awareness, it becomes our experience of reality. The way we act impacts the rest of existence as other awareness‘ experience. Like a wave caused by dropping a pebble into the ocean, those impacts we create don‘t stop with our action, but propagate throughout the ocean of experiential existence, destined eventually to return to their source. To understand the propagation of these experiential waves, we need to visualize existence as a sphere, as an interconnected, unified whole, which, indeed, it is. Our awareness, as inseparable ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 499 from the rest of existence, occupies a point somewhere on the surface of that sphere. Let‘s say that we can move either away from the center of the sphere (outward), or toward the center of the sphere (inward). We will define movement relatively away from the center of the sphere as movement into the dimension of what-is-not, and movement relatively toward the center of the sphere as movement into the dimension of what-is. As awareness, we can move into either the dimension of what-is or the dimension of what-is-not and so effectively extend the surface of the sphere either inward or outward. Each of these two different directions of movement creates a different experiential-wave orientation on the surface of the sphere. Once an experiential wave is created, it propagates around the surface of the sphere and eventually back to its point of origin, where it then impacts the awareness that originated it. An experiential wave that propagates as an outward extension, as movement into the dimension of what-is-not, eventually returns with that same orientation to negatively impact the awareness that originated it. Conversely, an experiential wave that propagates as an inward extension, as movement into the dimension of what-is, eventually returns with that same orientation to positively impact the awareness that originated it. Just as there exist physical laws, such as the speed-of-light constant, that represent consistent relationships within the structure of the universe, so there also exist nonphysical laws, such as the law of karma, that represent other consistent relationships within the structure of the universe. The law of karma is the experiential equivalent of Newton‘s third law of motion, which states that for every action there‘s an equal and opposite reaction. Thus, according to the law of karma, according to the way experiential waves must propagate within the context of an interconnected, unified whole, if an awareness does bad things—i.e., moves toward what-is-not, thereby creating waves of what-is-not—that awareness will itself eventually experience those what-is-not waves in the form of painful experiences as the waves inevitably return to impact their point of origin. Conversely, if an awareness does good things—i.e., moves toward what-is, thereby creating waves of what-is—that awareness will itself eventually experience those what-is waves in the form of pleasurable experiences as the waves inevitably return to impact their point of origin. These experiential waves may not return in one lifetime, but they will return at some point in the course of an awareness‘ ongoing existence. The movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not thus creates two types of painful experiences: pain from within and pain from without. Pain from within is what awareness experiences as increasing existential separation and self-division, resulting from its increasingly confining self-definition. Pain from without is what awareness experiences when an experiential wave of what-is-not returns to impact it. The external pain, the pain that comes from without, and the internal pain, the pain that comes from within, are each the result of the same movement, each the result of the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, creating an experience of existential separation both from within and from without. Awareness tries to avoid paying attention to the internal pain, the pain from within, by immersing itself in external pleasures. However, when awareness tries to mask the internal pain of existential separation by engaging in selfish pleasure, in actions that make it feel good but cause pain to others, then the pain simply ends up coming at awareness from the opposite ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 500 direction—i.e., from without rather than from within. Awareness can run, but it can‘t hide, from the pain of self-division. If it weren‘t for the law of karma, awareness could go on fooling itself indefinitely, forever masking the internal pain of its isolation through external pleasures that are ultimately selfdivisive. However, owing to the law of karma, an experiential wave of what-is-not always returns to the originating awareness. Awareness turns to external pleasures to try to avoid internal pain, and awareness turns to internal pleasure to try to avoid external pain. However, when faced with increasing external pain, as awareness turns inward to try to get internal pleasure, awareness is then confronted with internal pain, the internal self-division it‘s been trying to avoid. In this way, external pain, by approaching awareness from without, eventually forces awareness to turn toward, face, and deal with the internal pain created by its mistaken selfdefinitions. If not for the inevitability of experiential feedback, awareness could avoid this internal pain forever, thereby remaining forever isolated from the rest of existence. At some point, awareness has nowhere else to go, and so it turns inward to face its pain, the pain of self-division. Eventually, awareness becomes so fatigued from being caught in the cycle of self-ignorance, from fighting a battle it can never win, that awareness simply gives up. Awareness finally stops pushing ―it‖ away, lets go of its hold upon the barriers of self-definition, and surrenders to the ―it‖ that it feared, that it perceived as the enemy, as other, as the threat to the existence of itself as ―I.‖ However, instead of this surrender resulting in the oblivion of nonexistence that awareness had expected when it stopped defending ―I‖ from ―it,‖ awareness instead experiences release and relief from pain it had all along sought, a release and relief it could never have experienced as long as it maintained the wall separating ―I‖ from ―it,‖ separating one aspect of its existence from another. In that moment of fatigue, in that moment when all seems lost and awareness sees that there‘s no way to win, awareness by giving up finally frees itself and so allows itself to experience the connection between itself and the other part of itself it had for so long been pushing away. In that moment, awareness realizes that ―it‖ wasn‘t the source of the pain but that the source of the pain was, in fact, the act of pushing ―it‖ away, walling ―it‖ off as something separate from awareness as ―I.‖. In that moment, there‘s revelation—there‘s literally the revealing to awareness of what-is as it is. In that moment, awareness is able to experience the nature of its relationship to the rest of existence, which is one of connection, not separation. In the light of experiencing what-is, awareness now has a point of reference and is able to recognize the difference between what-is and what-is-not. After seeing the light of what-is illuminate the dark forest of what-is-not, awareness is no longer quite so attached to the unreality of what-is-not, for it has experienced another reality, a reality that lies beyond the forest. However, awareness doesn‘t usually get out of the forest of what-is-not right away. After this initial revelation, the light fades, and the unreality of the forest reasserts itself. For awareness has ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 501 wandered deep into the forest of what-is-not and in so doing has built many walls between itself and the rest of existence. These walls must each be deconstructed, and with each deconstruction, with the removal of each barrier of self-definition, awareness is reunited with whatever aspect of itself it had separated itself from by using that barrier of self-definition. Inevitably, awareness must face its fear, because what awareness fears are those aspects of existence it hasn‘t accepted as itself, those aspects of existence it has defined as other, as ―it,‖ as separate from its mistaken experience of itself as ―I.‖ Because existence is ultimately singular, in facing its fear, awareness faces itself; and in accepting its fear, awareness accepts itself and so becomes able to experience the nature of its relationship to the rest of existence, becomes increasingly aware of what it really is. While pain counters the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, pain and negative emotions can‘t by themselves be the only force that extracts awareness from the forest of what-is-not. There‘s a difference between running away from what-is-not and running toward what-is. Trying to run away from what-is-not isn‘t, in and of itself, movement toward what-is. While lost in a forest, we can run blindly with fear and only get increasingly lost. However, if we see a beacon and go toward it, then that movement can lead us out of the forest. Awareness can‘t extract itself from the forest of what-is-not and return to an experience of whatis until it actually re-turns its attention toward what-is. Pain eventually causes awareness to run away from what-is-not, but as long as awareness remains focused upon its fear, as long as awareness runs away looking back and being driven by what it fears, then awareness really is still moving within the dimension of what-is-not. Fearing existence isn‘t the same as loving existence. Fearing God isn‘t the same as loving God, although many people equate the two. Hanging out with God because we fear God is not the same as hanging out with God because we love to be in God‘s company. This is simply not the same relationship. In one relationship there‘s explicit connection, and in the other relationship there‘s implicit separation. As an example, let‘s say that someone we love becomes dangerous and has to be put in some type of psychiatric facility. Because we still love them, we want to see them, to be close to them, but because we also fear them, when we see them, we want a barrier in place that separates us from them. As long as that barrier is in place, we can‘t touch them, we can‘t be completely connected to them. As long as awareness fears existence in the largest sense, then awareness is bound to erect a wall between itself and the rest of existence in order to protect itself from the rest of existence. As long as such a wall is in place, awareness can‘t fully experience what-is because it‘s experiencing what-is-not. The reason why sincere ―God fearing‖ people often engage in actions of intolerance that cause others pain is because they‘re functioning within the self-divisive context of what-is-not (although, of course, they perceive themselves to be functioning within the unified context of what-is, inasmuch as they see themselves as performing the will of God). So, actions arising from within the self-divisive context of what-is-not naturally result in pain ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 502 and negative emotions. Conversely, ―God loving‖ people function within the unified context of what-is, and so their actions arising within that context inevitably result in ultimately positive outcomes. The trouble here is that everyone sees themself as doing the right thing, because it‘s the right thing for them within the context of the experiential reality or dimension of experience they occupy. What people don‘t generally realize is that their conception of reality may be a complete reversal of the actual nature of reality, and so what seems to be the right thing may actually be the wrong thing. People act according to the way they see reality structured, which includes the way they see themself fitting into that structure. If they see reality as divided, they‘ll act in a way that‘s consistent within the framework of that view. No awareness is really evil; no awareness is fundamentally what-is-not. Some people are just more lost and confused than others, and so their actions create more pain and more negative emotions than others‘ actions. Even people we may perceive as evil are just acting in a way that‘s consistent with their topsy-turvy, reversed view of reality. They‘re trapped deeply within the dimension of what-is-not, and we, as well as they, feel their pain. For this reason, if we hate evil, we ourselves inadvertently and unknowingly support the evil we hate, becoming twisted around and bound to act in ways that are ultimately self-divisive and selfdestructive. When we hate evil, we‘re not seeing the situation as it is but as it‘s not. When we hate evil, we want the evil to not exist; we want to destroy it. However, by trying to destroy what doesn‘t really exist in the first place, we prop it up; we help to create a relational dynamic that actually sustains and perpetuates the situation we‘re trying to destroy. By hating evil, by actively trying to get rid of evil, we provide evil with a relative basis for existence. Mahatma Gandhi understood this relational dynamic, and so he advocated and practiced passive resistance. People want to do the right thing; it‘s in their nature, but many times they become confused as to what the right thing is, because they‘re unknowingly functioning within a mistaken conception of reality. Actively trying to destroy what you perceive as evil only strengthens the position of what you‘re trying to destroy. Perhaps this is why Jesus of Nazareth advocated ―turning the other cheek‖ in response to aggression. Because evil doesn‘t ultimately exist, because what we see as evil is actually just the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not due to a mistaken conception of reality, evil can continue only so long as that mistaken conception of reality persists to support it. By hating and attacking what we see as the source of evil, we actively support the evilly acting awareness‘ perception of existence as separate from itself and so as dangerous to itself. On the other hand, when an evilly acting awareness eventually perceives no threat to its existence, the basis of its evil actions ceases to exist, and so the actions themselves must cease, since there‘s then no longer an experiential framework to support those actions. This relational dynamic is especially evident in the debate over abortion that‘s currently raging in the United States. In this debate, each side tries to ―demonize‖ the other, to portray the other as the devil, as ―evil.‖ Some who believe that abortion is an evil act consider the doctors who perform the abortions evil. A few anti-abortionists become so caught up in this mistaken ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 503 conception of reality that they‘re driven to try to kill the doctors, and in so doing commit the very act of ending life that they find so evil. This is an extreme example whereby the act of attacking what we perceive as evil itself creates the very evil that we‘re attacking. This is what happens when awareness functions fully, without restraint, within the dimension of what-is-not. The same relational dynamic also functions with regard to environmental extremism, whereby people injure other people (living creatures) to prevent animals (living creatures) from being injured. An action that‘s intended to destroy what we perceive as evil will always be an action that‘s equivalent to the evil we intend to destroy. Thus, we can‘t eliminate racism by attacking bigotry, for this action only polarizes each side of the conflict, and makes the reality of each position seem more independently real. Racism can‘t be eliminated by acting to eliminate racism itself but only by changing the experiential environment of separation ands self-division from which bigoted actions naturally extend. Not wanting bigots to exist is itself a form of bigotry and, again, is equivalent to the action it‘s intended to stop. Bigots aren‘t evil people; they‘re just people whose awareness is experiencing the pain that goes along with being lost in the forest of what-is-not. If a person is acting in a certain way out of experiencing pain, we can‘t stop their actions by causing the person to experience more pain. Rather, we can stop their actions only by first eliminating the cause of their pain, which is the actual source of their ―evil‖ actions. How many of us have been in an argument, and the more we yelled, the madder both we and the other person got? As long as we‘re yelling back at them, all they see is our attack upon them, convincing them of the need to attack back. So, the yelling just escalates the argument. On the other hand, how many of us have been in an argument but just let the other person yell and not responded with our own yelling? At some point, the other person, unless they‘re completely insane, hears themself yelling, since there‘s nothing else to hear, and just stops because they‘re then able to see what they‘re doing, and their aggressive action no longer has the necessary support of a complementary aggression. This relational dynamic functions in the same way at all levels of human interaction. 5.42 Judgment Jesus of Nazareth is quoted as saying, ―Judge not, that ye be not judged.‖ This saying represents a special case of the law of karma. If awareness judges some aspect of existence, then that judgment will inevitably come back to it and serve as a judgment upon itself. The universe itself is nonjudgmental; it just is what it is. In order for awareness to judge something, that something must first be charged—i.e., there must exist the experience of a positive/negative polarity between the existence being judged and the judging awareness. Where there‘s polarization, there‘s an experience of existential separation. Awareness generally sees its own position as positive, as what-is, and so in relation to itself inevitably considers any other awareness or aspect of existence that takes a different position as negative, as what-is-not. It‘s this experiencing and defining of another aspect of existence as what-is-not that‘s ―passing ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 504 judgment,‖ and the sentence that awareness inevitably passes down is that this other aspect of existence shouldn‘t exist, or has no right to exist, since it‘s perceived to be what-is-not. In this way, awareness creates an experiential barrier between itself and the aspect of existence it judges to be nonexistent, or unworthy of existence. Thus, the act of judgment represents another way in which awareness becomes experientially separated from the rest of existence. Because existence is really inseparable from itself, the act of judgment must represent a movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, into an experiential reality where the relationship that existence has with itself is experienced as it‘s not—i.e., as separate. In this way, the act of judgment, denying the right to existence of some other aspect of existence, creates an experiential wave of what-is-not that eventually returns to its point of origin, impacting the awareness as a denial of its own right to exist, as a judgment upon its own existence. Thus, ―Judge not, that ye be not judged.‖ Or, stated in the opposite way, if you judge, then that judgment will inevitably return as a judgment upon yourself. All existence is equal, because it‘s all the same existence. The act of judgment involves awareness attempting to assign different degrees of validity to different aspects of existence. This action applies to judging things as either good or bad, as more and less deserving of existence. Both types of judgment are equally mistaken, equally what-is-not, for we can‘t judge something as better without simultaneously judging something else as worse. However, isn‘t saying that the act of judgment is a mistake itself an act of judgment? No, it‘s simply a nonjudgmental recognition of the way existence functions within the dimension of experience. Saying that an action is a mistake isn‘t the same as saying that the existence undertaking that action is a mistake, i.e., something which shouldn‘t exist. A mistake is an action that awareness takes which creates a result that‘s the opposite of what was intended, usually because awareness wasn‘t fully aware of the context within which it was acting. So, there‘s a difference between recognizing negative actions, actions that arise within the dimension of what-is-not, and trying to assign or attribute that negativity or what-is-not-ness to the awareness that‘s taking the negative action. While actions may be what-is-not because the awareness that‘s taking them is lost within the dimension of what-is-not, awareness itself is always what-is, always existent. This is why judging actions is necessary, for they may arise from either what-is or what-is-not; but judging other existences is a mistake, for existence is always what-is—i.e., existence always exists. Thus, for example, there are no bad children, only children who do bad things. More inclusively, there are no evil existences, no evil awarenesses, only aspects of existence that take actions from within the confusion and relative unawareness of the dimension of what-is-not. Any action arising from within the dimension of what-is-not is a mistake, for it will have an ultimate result that‘s the opposite of its intended result. This is because, when awareness is experiencing what-is-not, the perception that produces the intention-action is always the exact opposite of what the situation actually is. Awareness always acts upon reality as it is, regardless of how reality is perceived. That is, our perceptions and conceptions regarding the nature of reality, while they may shape our own experience, have no effect upon the nature of reality ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 505 beyond experience. So, an action arising from an experience of what-is-not acts upon reality not as it‘s perceived or conceived to be, but as it actually is, and it therefore has a result that‘s the opposite of what was intended, because the reality it acts upon is the opposite of how it‘s perceived or conceived to be. Science often speaks of action and reaction. However, as Buckminster Fuller liked to point out, there‘s action, reaction, and resultant, the resultant being the way the reaction affects what performed the action. I push on a wall (the action), the wall pushes back (the reaction), and my hand goes nowhere (the result). In the case of awareness, there‘s intention-action-reaction-result. This is both a linear and a cyclic relationship. The intention is the desired result, the result that‘s intended, the ―carrot on a stick‖ that sets awareness in motion, that causes awareness to act. Awareness acts with the intention to create some result. The action is suited to impact existence and cause a certain reaction, producing a certain result that corresponds to the intention. The difference between the intention and the result is that the intention is born of, and determined by, how awareness experiences reality, while the result is determined by the actual nature of reality. The intention is purely experiential, while the result transcends the relativity of experiential reality, although it may be experienced. When the intention arises from a mistaken conception of reality, i.e., from an experience of what-is-not, the result will itself always be a mistake, or the opposite of what was intended. This is because, when existence is perceived incorrectly, reality won‘t react in the way anticipated but rather will react oppositely; so, the action arising from a mistaken intention will cause an opposite reaction and, thus, an opposite resultant acting back upon the doer of the action. For example, let‘s say that in front of me sits a bowl of some liquid. I perceive this liquid to be water. I have a burning match in my hand that I intend to put out, and so I perform the action of dropping it in the water, so that the water can react to the match, producing the result of its being extinguished. However, as it turns out, my perception of the liquid is incorrect, isn‘t what‘s was really there. The liquid isn‘t water but gasoline. So, while my intention and action remain the same, being born only of experience, the reaction and resultant are quite a bit different, since these are dependent on what actually exists where I experience the water to be. Although my intention is to put the match out so that I won‘t get burned, the actual result is the opposite of my intention, because the chain linking intention to result has a twist in it, inasmuch as the reaction is the opposite of what was anticipated. The intention itself isn‘t wrong; it‘s natural not to want to get burned, to be hurt, to feel pain, but the actual nature of reality in which the intention-actionreaction-result arises as an experiential construct isn‘t what it appears to be—i.e., it‘s what-isnot. At the deepest root of all actions are seemingly good intentions, basically the intention to create pleasure and to reduce or avoid pain. By its nature as what-is, awareness can‘t act with any other intention; can‘t seek or form any other idea of how it would like to be impacted by a result, other than in an ultimately positive way. However, the key is the context within which such an intention is defined as good. That is, the key is how the intending awareness defines itself in relation to the rest of existence. The more awareness defines itself as separate from the rest of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 506 existence, the more its good intentions will be selfish, designed to result in pleasure for its isolated self. Conversely, the more awareness defines itself as connected to the rest of existence, the more its good intentions will be unselfish, designed to result in pleasure for whatever aspects of existence it defines itself as connected to. Awareness doesn‘t care what result its actions have on those aspects of existence it doesn‘t feel connected to. Awareness defines itself as what-is, and what awareness experiences as separate from itself is defined as what-is-not. Awareness develops good intentions only within the framework of results as they apply to the existence that awareness defines itself as connected to. As perverse as the notion may sound, Adolph Hitler had to be acting within the context of what he had defined as good intentions, within an exceptionally mistaken conception of reality, thereby resulting in exceptionally painful experiences for large number of people. Hitler wasn‘t intrinsically evil; he was an awareness that had become very deeply lost in the forest of what-isnot. If we can understand how these concepts apply in the most extreme cases, then we can more easily apply them to less extreme cases as well. Hating Hitler, wishing Hitler didn‘t exist, judging Hitler to be evil, does absolutely nothing to Hitler‘s awareness or existence. Karma takes care of that without judgment. Likewise, hating anything or anyone, judging anything or anyone to be evil, to be undeserving of existence, can have no effect upon their existence because they can‘t be made to not exist. However, hatred does have an ultimately negative impact upon those who do the hating, regardless of how righteous their hatred may seem. Yet we still feel the need to hate, to pass judgment, because we think that if we don‘t, then we‘re not ―doing our duty‖ to rid existence of what we perceive or conceive to be evil. In this way, hatred and judgment are themselves evil actions borne of mistakenly good intentions. The mistake is that we perceive the person, the awareness, as evil, when only the actions taken are evil. Hatred and judgment, like all actions taken out of a mistaken conception of reality, out of an experience of what-is-not, produce a result for awareness that‘s the opposite of what was intended. We hate and judge, intending to act as a force to rid the world of evil, but all that hatred and judgment accomplish is the creation of the very actions they were intended to stop. The source of evil actions is experiential self-division. To stop evil actions, experiential selfdivision needs to be lessened. However, all that hatred and judgment do is increase experiential self-division, thereby forming the basis for more evil actions, more actions born of an experience of what-is-not. This is how hating evil with the intention of eliminating it has the opposite effect of promoting evil actions. Good intentions occurring within the context of ignorance, within the context of self-division, produce a reaction and then a result that are the opposite of what was intended. In fact, whatever result is created ultimately impacts the intending awareness itself, not the existence it was intended for. We can‘t cause some other aspect of existence to not exist; all we can do is increase our own experiential self-division and thus drive ourself deeper into the dimension of what-is-not. Whatever the actual result is, it always returns to the intending awareness; this is the law of karma. In other words, awareness always must itself eventually bear the actual result of its own intentions. Intentions may always be good, but results aren‘t always good, because intentions can be defined both within the dimension of what-is and within the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 507 dimension of what-is-not. Good as defined within the dimension of what-is is good, but good as defined within the dimension of what-is-not is actually evil. If we‘re judgmental, then we become bound to defend our polarized position, because, having become polarized, we become engaged in a battle of perceived good versus evil. Conversely, if we can remain nonjudgmental, then the situation can present itself as it is, without the blinding context of polarization and separation. Being nonjudgmental doesn‘t mean being wishy-washy. On the contrary, being nonjudgmental means recognizing the underlying unity of existence, the ultimate equality of all that exists, while simultaneously recognizing the relative existence of what-is and what-is-not. In the context of nonjudgment, we don‘t make the mistake of supporting what-is-not by trying to destroy it. This is the tricky part. We need to be able to recognize mistakes, to see the difference between what-is and what-is-not, but we need to do so nonjudgmentally, without passing judgment, without becoming polarized. Because if we become polarized, we become lost; we separate ourself in some way from the rest of existence. Recognizing mistakes doesn‘t create a negative experiential wave; passing judgment upon those who make mistakes does. By not judging, we can support what is good, rather than accidentally supporting what is evil. Here, in describing karma and judgment, we aren‘t trying to say what should and shouldn‘t exist. Rather, we‘re simply describing how awareness functions within the context of different experiential realities. By passing judgment, by polarizing ourself, by putting ourself in a position that says ―this or that other aspect of existence shouldn‘t exist,‖ we engage ourself in a battle against existence that can never be won, i.e., where there can literally never be the experience of oneness or unity. For whatever exists does exist, and when we intend for it to not exist, we separate ourself from it. We thus create internal pain, and we also create experiential waves that eventually must return as a resultant force in opposition to our own existence. Whenever we reject existence, existence rejects us; whenever we accept existence, existence accepts us. ―Judge not, that ye be not judged.‖ It‘s interesting that passing judgment on something or someone else actually results in our own awareness becoming imprisoned. We humans seem to be highly judgment prone. This is because, as awareness operating to a great extent within the dimension of what-is-not, we‘ve confused the need to distinguish with a need to destroy, and confused the need to determine with a need to discriminate against. We need to distinguish between what-is and what-is-not, but we don‘t need to destroy what-is-not. We need to determine what-is and what-is-not, but we don‘t need to discriminate against existence that we perceive as operating from within the dimension of what-is-not. Within the context of what-is, awareness considers all existences equal regardless of their perceived stature, because it‘s aware that they‘re all equally valid. This doesn‘t mean that we go walking down a dark alley with a murderous lunatic so as not to offend them. While we have no real ability to deny the validity of any existence, it‘s equally true that we have no real obligation to accompany or assist another existence in actions that we determine to be what-is-not. Everything works both ways. Actively opposing what-is-not is a mistake, in that it produces results that are the opposite of what‘s intended, while not assisting ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 508 what-is-not isn‘t a mistake, in that it produces results that are consistent with what‘s intended. Ergo the validity of passive resistance: providing neither opposition nor assistance to actions that are perceived to be evil, or what-is-not. At this point, we might ask whether, according to this philosophy, shouldn‘t the world have just let Hitler run over it without opposition or resistance to his evil actions? Here, all that we can say is that there‘s a subtle difference between resisting evil, and opposing evil. Resisting evil means that you don‘t let evil actions complete their cycle or produce their intended result. Opposing evil means that you try to eliminate from existence the apparent doer of the action. One method is effective, and the other ultimately isn‘t, but the difference isn‘t always clear-cut. We‘re correctly taught that some actions are good and some actions are evil. However, we‘re incorrectly taught that good deserves to exist and evil shouldn‘t exist, for this leads us to selfrighteous attempts to destroy what we perceive as evil. There can be no experience of what-is except in relation to an equally valid experience of what-is-not. Without the possibility of knowing what-is-not, we couldn‘t know what-is. Good and evil, what-is and what-is-not, both exist, but only as relative realities, only as relative actions. There‘s no existence that‘s absolutely what-is-not; there‘s nothing that exists which shouldn‘t exist. This is simply the way the universe is structured. You can fight it, or you can accept it. Fighting it simply creates more of what you‘re fighting. Accepting it doesn‘t mean that you promote the negative, but it does mean that you don‘t try to destroy the negative, because trying to destroy the negative only inadvertently creates more negative. This is simply the way things work in the topsy-turvy land of what-is-not, where destroying what-is-not actually creates it, and accepting what-is-not actually causes it to cease to exist. 5.5 The evolution of awareness Moving our awareness toward what-is for the sake of what-is means that we‘re being moved by an attraction to what-is, out of love, rather than being moved by an aversion to what-is-not, out of fear or hate. In moving toward what-is for its own sake, and for our sake, we feel a connection to what-is, and so we experience this movement toward what-is as the positive emotion of love, rather than as the negative emotion of fear or hate. We‘re naturally attracted to what-is because it‘s what we are. We‘re attracted to what-is as the manifestation of our unbreakable connection to what-is. Being aware of the connection, we experience the attraction and feel the love; being unaware of the connection, we experience the separation and feel the fear or hate. Once awareness has had enough of pain and negative emotion, it begins to make a conscious attempt, a determined effort, to escape from the cage it finds itself trapped in. Again, the difficulty is that awareness, having wandered into the dimension of what-is-not, is caught in a vicious cycle of self-ignorance. Once awareness has gotten lost in the dimension of what-is-not, even though it may want to get out, because it‘s in the topsy-turvy land of what-is-not, the actions that it thinks will free it only bind it tighter. The cycle of self-ignorance accompanying the experience of what-is-not keeps awareness from seeing that it‘s its own jailer. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 509 At this point, we can identify three stages in the evolution of awareness. The first stage is a free fall into the experiential dimension of what-is-not. In this first stage, awareness moves relatively unimpeded into what-is-not. In this first stage, the external pleasure that awareness derives through selfish actions outweighs the accompanying internal pain of self-division. This first stage was described primarily in subsection 5.31, ―The trap of misidentification.‖ The second stage in the evolution of awareness is the slowing or stopping of its free fall into the dimension of what-is-not, as the pain and negative emotions coming from both within and without begin to dominate the awareness. Awareness‘ natural aversion to the self-division that it experiences as pain, begins, in this second stage, to counter its tendency to move confusedly deeper into the forest of what-is-not, where it has mistaken what-is-not for what-is. This second stage was described primarily in subsection 5.4, ―Pleasure and pain.‖ The third stage in the evolution of awareness is marked by awareness‘ determined effort to get itself out of the land of pain, negativity, self-ignorance, and confusion that it eventually discovers it has wandered into. This third stage involves awareness‘ becoming increasingly aware of its connection to the rest of existence, and thereby learning or remembering how to create ultimately positive rather than ultimately negative experiences for itself, within the context of an expanding self-definition. This third stage has yet to be described; it will be the subject of the upcoming section on free will. The free fall of the first stage in the evolution of awareness is like falling out of bed while asleep and dreaming. Awareness is literally asleep, inasmuch as it‘s completely unaware that its experience of reality as what-is-not is a dream, real yet ultimately unreal within the context of a more fundamental reality. Dreams are real while you‘re asleep, just as what-is-not is real while you‘re experiencing it. Likewise, in contrast to awake experience, dreams don‘t seem to be real; and in contrast to the experience of what-is, what-is-not no longer seems to be real. The increasing pain and negative emotions of the second stage in the evolution of awareness is analogous to awareness as it hits the floor, being jarred awake from the dream, just beginning to wake up and realize that the dream may not have been as real as it seemed. The determined effort of the third stage in the evolution of awareness is analogous to awareness trying to wake up while still being very sleepy. Some times awareness starts to get up but ends up falling back asleep and resuming the dream, reentering the dimension of what-is-not out of habit, out of being caught in the cycle of self-ignorance. Other times, awareness thinks it has awoken, like the person whose alarm clock goes off and then begins getting out of bed, only to wake up later and find they‘re still in bed and that their getting out of bed was itself a dream. Eventually, the pain and negative emotions become great enough, and awareness hits the floor hard enough, that it‘s jarred awake, allowing it to see clearly the difference between the unreality of the dream (what-is-not) and the reality of awake experience (what-is). Awareness then decides that it‘s had enough sleep, has had its fill of relative unawareness and what-is-not, and becomes determined in its effort to wake up and become aware of what‘s really going on. In the next section, we will look at this conscious attempt by awareness to wake up, to use what it sees as its ―free will‖ to extricate itself from the painful emotional experience of what-is-not. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 510 Conceptual checkpoint II-6 -Experience, as what defines awareness, represents a someplace awareness can be. -Awareness can experience what-is or what-is-not and so can exist within the dimension of whatis or the dimension of what-is-not. -Awareness can experience itself as ―I‖ in relation to ―it‖ within the dimension of what-is or within the dimension of what-is-not. -Awareness that experiences itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is doesn‘t become confused as to the actual nature of its own existence, since within the dimension of what-is, existence‘s relationship to itself is projected as it is. -Awareness that experiences itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not becomes confused as to the actual nature of its own existence, since within the dimension of what-is-not, existence‘s relationship to itself is reflected as it‘s not. -Awareness that experiences itself as ―I‖ within the dimension of what-is-not, being then unaware of what-is, being unaware of its connection to the rest of existence, mistakes this limited experience of itself as ―I‖ for what it really is. That is, awareness considers ―I‖ to be all it is. -Once awareness has mistakenly associated or attached its existence to the experience of ―I‖ awareness is then able to perceive and conceive of the dissolution of this ―I‖ as its own nonexistence. -Awareness then feels the need to defend this ―I‖ in order to prevent its own nonexistence. -In order to defend ―I,‖ in order to maintain the existence of ―I,‖ a vicious cycle ensues, whereby awareness erects progressively more barriers of self-definition between its experience of itself as ―I‖ and the ―its‖ which are perceived to be a threat to the existence of that ―I.‖ -These barriers of self-definition serve to functionally (but not actually) separate awareness from the rest of existence, for they cause awareness to become increasingly unaware and unable to experience its connection to the rest of existence. -Existence is inseparable from itself. Therefore, in terms of experience, connection is what-is, and separation is what-is-not. -The functional separation of awareness from some aspect of existence is experienced by awareness as pain. The more narrowly defined ―I‖ is, the more functionally separated awareness becomes, and the more pain awareness experiences as a result. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 511 -The functional connection of awareness to some aspect of existence is experienced by awareness as pleasure. The more broadly defined ―I‖ is, the more functionally connected awareness becomes, and the more pleasure awareness experiences as a result. -It‘s natural for awareness, as existence, to seek pleasure and avoid pain—i.e., to be in a state of what-is, rather than in a state of what-is-not. -Any attempt by awareness to get itself as ―I‖ out of the painful state of what-is-not only reinforces the mistaken conception of reality that ―I‖ is what it is, which is itself the source of the pain. Once awareness moves into the dimension of what-is-not, it becomes bound by the cycle of self-ignorance to move deeper into that dimension, and to remain inadvertently trapped by itself within that dimension, until the unnaturalness of the pain of self-division becomes great enough to counter the direction of movement caused by the cycle of self-ignorance, finally allowing awareness to reevaluate its direction of movement and where it‘s really going. Section 6 Free Will and Intention 6.1 Free will and experience In order for awareness to extricate itself from the pain of what-is-not, awareness must learn how to use its free will to direct itself into experiences of what-is rather than experiences of what-isnot. The concept of free will itself centers on the concept of choice, a seeming ability to choose between opposite paths or actions. To understand free will and how we can use it to escape from the experiential dimension of what-is-not, we need to understand what it really means to choose. As we‘ve seen throughout this work, the deeper meaning of a word, the underlying process or reality a word points to, can often be found in its homonym—i.e., an identity of sound between different words indicates some level of shared meaning. In this case, the word ―choose‖ sounds like the word ―chews.‖ Chewing is a well-known physical process. Choosing is a nonphysical process, a process of awareness, and is therefore more difficult to pin down. So, let‘s use what we know about the well-known process of chewing to help uncover what‘s involved in the unknown process of choosing. Question: What do the words ―choose‖ and ―chews‖ (choosing and chewing) have in common—i.e., what‘s their shared meaning? Answer: Both words refer to processes of consumption. In order for our physical bodies to continue to exist, it‘s necessary for us to process (chew) and consume other physical objects, i.e., food. Likewise, in order for the nonphysical aspect of our being to continue to exist—i.e., our awareness, our particular localization of consciousness—it‘s necessary for our awareness to process (choose) and consume something nonphysical as well. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 512 What is it that our awareness must consume in order to continue to exist? Experience. Without experience, awareness simply ceases to exist as such. Awareness is consciousness localized to a particular somewhere through experience. Experience defines consciousness as awareness. Therefore, for awareness to continue to exist as such, it must continuously consume experience, continuously define itself through experience. Before we can properly consume something physical —i.e., use it to sustain our physical being, our body—we must process it in some way: we must chew it. Likewise, before we can properly consume an experience—i.e., use it to sustain our nonphysical being, our awareness—we must process it in some way: we must choose it. When we chew food, we‘re in the process of making what‘s in the food a part of us, part of our physical being, part of our body. When we choose an experience, we‘re in the process of making what‘s in the experience a part of us, part of our nonphysical being, part of our awareness. Physically, we are what we eat. Nonphysically, we are the experiences we choose to nourish our awareness. If we consume rotten food, our physical body will become diseased, it won‘t grow and won‘t be able to heal itself. Likewise, if we consume negative experiences, experiences of what-is-not, our awareness will become diseased, it won‘t grow and won‘t be able to heal itself. The dimension of experience exists to allow consciousness functioning as awareness to create and consume the experiences of what-is and/or what-is-not, i.e., positive and/or negative experiences, respectively. Positive experiences represent realities and relationships that transcend experience, that exist beyond the dimension of experience. Negative experiences represent realities and relationships that have no existence beyond the dimension of experience. Only within the dimension of experience can what-is-not appear to exist. So, only within the dimension of experience can there be a real choice between what-is or what-is-not, between positive and negative. Existence is inseparable from itself, yet we can choose to create an experience of separation, and thereby experience what-is-not as real. On the other hand, we can choose to create an experience of unity, and thereby experience what-is as real. Such is the situation for consciousness functioning as awareness within the dimension of experience: the possibility of choose to create the experience of what-is must coexist with the possibility of choosing to create the experience of what-is-not. Choosing to consume positive experiences allows our awareness to grow beyond the confines of five-sensory experiential reality, to expand into the dimension of what-is that lies beyond experience and is the source of all experience. Choosing to consume negative experiences hides from us the dimension of what-is that lies beyond experience and is the source of all experience. Our existence as awareness creates for each of us a unique experiential reality. Experience is a relationship between the consciousness we are ―in here‖ and the consciousness impacting us from ―out there.‖ Were we not here to be so impacted, what we experience as reality simply wouldn‘t exist as we experience it to exist. Therefore, we‘re an integral part of whatever we ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 513 experience as reality. Experience isn‘t just something that happens to us passively; experience is something we‘re each actively involved in creating, in each moment. Just as the experimental setup determines whether the experience of a wave or particle becomes a physical reality, how we set ourselves up, how we ourself up, how we position ourself, determines the nature of the experiences we create as our reality. How we position ourself is called our attitude. The position of an airplane relative to a runway as it approaches the runway for landing is called its attitude. Likewise, our position relative to the experiences approaching us is our attitude. When the airplane meets the ground—i.e., is impacted by the ground—the nature of the landing as either smooth or rough primarily depends on the airplane‘s attitude. Likewise, it‘s our attitude—our position and posture relative to existence that‘s impacting us—that determines, more than anything, the nature of our experiences. Position ourself one way, and we create for ourself the experience of what-is; position ourself the opposite way, and we create for ourself the experience of what-is-not. To understand how we position ourself to create experiences of what-is and/or what-is-not for our consumption, we need to examine the word ―intention.‖ Intention = in-tension. Physically, a tension is a bending force. Therefore, nonphysically, intention refers to an internal bending force. Intention is literally the internal force of consciousness we use to bend, shape, move toward, and create the experiences we will consume. Again, we create experiences for our consumption in order to maintain our existence as awareness. Creating experiences for our consumption is analogous to cooking, to preparing food for our consumption. How we feel after we eat depends on the ingredients we put into the food. Intention is the ingredient that consciousness uses to create an experience. In terms of how we feel emotionally after consuming an experience, the form or shape of the experience itself isn‘t important; what‘s important is the intention—i.e., the force of consciousness—used to create the experience. We each are an inseparable, yet individual, part of the flow of existence. The dimension of experience gives each of us the ability and opportunity to create experiences by directing our individual flow either with or against the larger flow of existence. Actually, we‘re always going with the flow of existence, for there‘s nothing else. However, experiential reality, with its relativity of what-is and what-is-not, where both what-is and what-is–not are real, provides awareness with the opportunity to experience the unreal as real, to experience the impossible as possible, to experience itself as flowing in opposition to the flow of existence, in opposition to itself. The flow of existence is called Tao. Consider the flow of existence as a river. The river flows from the source to the source. That‘s its direction—away from the source and yet always toward the source. We experience the force of this flow as the force of desire. Experience places us upon the bank of the river Tao, in relation to the timeless flow of existence. We too are that flow, and the force of our flow is also the force of desire, but we‘re an aspect of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 514 that flow which has formed a relationship with itself. Our aspect of the flow that exists in relation to the larger flow is a force of will. That is, the force of consciousness intrinsic to our part of the flow is called our will. The word ―will‖ is the future tense of the verb ―be.‖ Being is what we always are. ―Will‖ is the force that we, as individual beings, use to get where we‘re going—i.e., ―will‖ is the force of consciousness we use to become what we are. We are beings that are in the process of becoming, moving from the source to the source, and so the individual force that moves us toward what we‘re becoming is called ―will.‖ It‘s all still existence, all still consciousness; however, at different relational levels of reality, the force of the flow of existence has different names. The force of will is the force of desire, but it‘s the force of desire that has formed a relationship with itself. As a consequence of that relationship, we can direct our part of the flow, our individual flow, our force of will, either with or against the larger flow of existence, depending on which direction we focus our attention, upstream or downstream. In directing our individual flow—i.e., our force of will—the force of our will becomes the force of intention. That is, the force of intention is the force of will that‘s been directed either with or against the flow of existence. Thus, there are only two basic forces of intention: a force that goes with the flow of existence, i.e., a positive intention; and a force that goes against the flow of existence, i.e., a negative intention. Free will is our ability to direct the force of our individual flow, our will, in relation to the larger flow. Free will is the ability to choose which force of intention, positive or negative, to use in creating experience. Free will is our ability, within the dimension of experience, to control the direction of our becoming by allowing us to choose the type of experiences we‘ll create and consume in order to nourish our awareness, the becoming of our being. How do we use free will? How do we control the direction of our flow in relation to the larger flow? How do we direct our individual force of consciousness with or against the larger flow, making it then our force of intention? We direct our will, making it intention, according to the possible experiences upon which we focus our attention. We direct our will, making it intention, according to whether we focus our attention on possible experiences (i.e., experiences we can create) that require us to move downstream or upstream, with or against the flow of existence. Attention and intention are closely related. Attention determines intention. That is, the direction in which you focus your awareness, your at-tension—with or against the larger flow of existence—determines the direction in which your force of consciousness, your will, flows, and so determines whether your force of will functions as a positive or negative intention in creating the experiences your awareness will consume. The relationships between the forces of desire, will, and intention are depicted in figure 100. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 515 possible experience of what-is positive intention negative intention absolute existence choice of attentionintention desire for wholeness (awareness) possible experience of what-is-not will (consciousness) Figure 100 The dimension of experience in which we currently find ourself is composed of consciousness-existence that has formed relationships with itself. Intrinsic to these relationships is a dynamic, a flow, from the source to the source. The force of that flow in its most basic state is the desire for wholeness, the force of the unbroken flow from the source to the source (the direction of flow denoted by arrows). As tributaries of awareness develop in relation the larger flow of consciousness, the force of desire in those tributaries becomes the force of will. Thus, the force of will is the force of desire functioning at the level of individual beings. Because will exists as a force of the flow of our existence in relation to the larger flow, there are then two possible ways our awareness can direct itself relative to the larger flow in order to create experience for itself. The force of will becomes the force of intention once awareness chooses to focus its attention on moving toward, and thus creating, one of two complementary possible experiences, one lying downstream and the other lying upstream. Thus, the force of will becomes the force of intention once awareness has chosen between creating an experience by moving with or against the larger flow of existence. Whether it‘s called desire, will, or intention, it‘s always the same flow, always the same force; but that same flow and force acting at different relational levels of existence seems to be something different. Furthermore, that same flow and force moving in different relational alignments creates different types of experiences. Thus, intention, whether positive or negative, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 516 is fundamentally the force of desire, the force of the flow of consciousness, acting in a directed way within the dimension of experience. That our will exists as a force of the flow of our existence in relation to the larger flow means that there are always two possible ways our awareness can direct itself relative to that larger flow in order to create experience for itself. Thus, the nature of the experiences we create depends on how our force of will directed as intention is aligned in relation to the larger flow. If attention determines intention, then what determines the direction in which we direct our attention? We act in accordance with whatever experience we think will satisfy our desire. Desire is the mover, but it doesn‘t itself determine the direction of motion, any more than gasoline determines where a car goes. What we desire is part of what we are, part of what we are becoming. We can‘t change what we truly, in our deepest self, desire. What we can control is the nature of the experiences we create and consume to satisfy our desire. If our stomach is empty, we‘ll feel hungry—i.e., we‘ll desire food. We can‘t help but desire food; it‘s part of being physically alive. However, we do usually have choices about how we‘ll satisfy that desire. Some foods are good for us, some are bad for us. Some foods make us healthy, some make us sick. Why would we choose to eat foods that make us sick, that make us unhealthy? Because of the confusion that results from mistaking what-is-not for what-is, mistaking what‘s bad for us for what‘s good for us. Desire is the force and flow of existence moving toward itself. As awarenesses, we all have the same hunger, the same desire, to be whole, to move toward the source. As awarenesses, we seek wholeness through the consumption of experiences. Just as being alive creates hunger (an emptiness of the stomach) and so creates the desire for food as a way to put an end to the feeling of emptiness in our stomach, being aware creates an existential emptiness and so creates the desire for experience as a way to put an end to the feeling of emptiness in our being. The Buddha is often quoted as having said that ―desire is the cause of all suffering,‖ implying that desire is by nature a negative force. However, the quote is more accurately translated as ―deluded desire is the cause of all suffering.‖ In this translation, it‘s not desire itself that‘s said to be the cause of suffering; rather, it‘s the force of desire used within the context of delusion, of self-deception, of self-division, of what-is-not, that‘s said to be the cause of suffering. This is a very important distinction. Just as we have a choice about what food to cook and eat in order to satisfy our physical hunger, the emptiness of our stomach, so too do we have a choice as to what experiences to create and consume in order to satisfy our nonphysical hunger, the emptiness of our being. Our actions are driven by the force of intention, powered by our desire for wholeness. Our intentions, the force and flow of our consciousness, create experiences for ourself and also contribute to the experiences of those around us. Likewise, the intentions of those around us contribute to our experiences. However, it‘s our own intentions that determine the what-is or what-is-not nature of our own experiences. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 517 The types of experiences we create depend on our intentions, not on our actions. Paddling upstream or downstream involves the same action, but the destination isn‘t the same; the destination depends on the intention. Likewise, the experience we arrive at depends on whether we use a positive or negative intention to get there. Positive intentions have many names: love, compassion, understanding, and tolerance, to name a few. Whatever positive intention we use, they all have the same result—an experience that feels emotionally good. Negative intentions also have many names: fear, hate, anger, and intolerance, to name a few. Whatever negative intention we use, they also all have the same result—an experience that feels emotionally bad. Emotions = existential motions = the movement of our awareness into the experiential dimension of either what-is or what-is-not, into either a positive or a negative experience. The emotion we experience, positive or negative, isn‘t determined by external events; it‘s determined internally, by intention, by the force of consciousness we‘re using to create our experience of reality. For example, if someone cuts us off in traffic, sometimes we get angry, and sometimes we let it go. Externally, it‘s the same event, but what we feel emotionally depends primarily on our choice of direction, our intention, the force of consciousness we ourself are adding to the experience. Free will operates when we choose what intention-ingredient, positive or negative, to put into our experience-recipe. If we‘re unaware of what‘s going on within ourself at this level of choosing, then our intentions are hidden, but they have the same effect: we still must eventually consume any experience we create and feel how we feel. It may be that we consume the experience immediately or in another lifetime. That we ourself must eventually consume the experiences we create has already been discussed in subsection 5.41 as the law of karma. Karma, positive or negative, is the result of intention, not action. We can create our karma in either ignorance or awareness. We can choose our intentions openly or hiddenly, overtly or covertly: in either case, we choose; and in either case, we‘re responsible for the experience we create as a result of our intentional choice. Before we create an experience, we must envision it as a possibility—i.e., we must ―in‖-vision it, literally see it in our mind‘s eye. Once we‘ve envisioned the possible experience, we can then focus our attention on it, thereby turning our force of will into a directed force of intention, which force is then capable of converting the envisioned experience into an external or actualized experience. How is it that we have the ability to create experience for ourself? The universe was created by consciousness existing in relation to itself, and we are that consciousness. Therefore, the creative force responsible for the existence of the universe resides in each of us as well. As a consequence, through the force of our localized consciousness, we‘re able to create just as the universe creates, using our consciousness to create relationships on a smaller scale, on an individual scale. The force and flow of our will directed as intention in relation to the larger flow creates currents in the larger flow. Those currents, if sustained long enough, can eventually lead ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 518 to an actualized or externalized experience. Although few of us may be aware of it, we each have this power and are using it all the time. As consciousness flows through us, by directing our will as intention, we create currents of consciousness, relationships of consciousness to itself. Since reality is composed of consciousness existing in relation to itself, we‘re able, by creating currents of consciousness, to create reality. Thus, we each have the ability to create reality through the directed force of our will, through intention. Reality is existential self-relation. Create relationships, and you create reality. However, there‘s a catch. Whatever reality we create, we must ourself eventually experience. What‘s the difference between the force of will and the force of intention? The force of intention is the force of will that‘s been committed to creating a certain experience. That is, the force of will doesn‘t become the force of intention, capable of creating experience, until a choice has been made between opposite paths, between going with or against the flow. The nature of experiential reality is such that there are always opposing choices, always two basic possible experiences to choose to create. For any possible experience of what-is, there must also exist the possible experience of what-is-not. These two paths of experiential creation always lie before awareness. Thus, awareness must continually choose between directing its will either with or against the larger flow of existence. It‘s only once awareness has chosen to direct its attention toward the possible experience of either what-is or what-is-not that the force of will then functions as the force of intention, capable of actualizing an envisioned experience. It‘s only once the flow and force of desire-willintention is committed to a single direction that there‘s then enough conscious force to convert the envisioned experience into an actualized external reality, into a consumable experience, into an experience that‘s capable of sustaining the existence of awareness. As an analogy, let‘s say that we have two ovens in which we can create experience. One oven creates experiences of what-is, and the other creates experiences of what-is-not. Although we have two ovens, we have only one source of energy, one pipeline of consciousness that splits, leading into both. Where the pipeline splits, there‘s a switch that can set the flow of creative energy completely to one oven or the other, or to any amount in between. If we split the energy—i.e., the force of consciousness—coming through the single pipeline into both ovens, neither oven is able to get hot enough to cook and create the possible experience inside. Only once we commit all the energy coming through the pipeline toward one oven or the other can either get hot enough to convert the possible experience into an actual experience, into a consumable experience. Likewise, only once we direct our attention fully toward one possible experience over another does our will then become intention, able to act as a force in creating experience. That is, intention, in order to function as such, needs to carry the full force of our will. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 519 Not choosing between possible experiences itself represents a choice that‘s been made, a choice of not choosing over choosing. In the case of not choosing between possible experiences, we then create the experience that‘s the result of the choice to not choose. Thus, it‘s impossible to not choose; it‘s impossible to not direct our individual flow, our will, in one direction or the other, with or against the larger flow of existence, while existing as awareness. Sometimes not choosing may be going with the flow; sometimes it may be going against the flow. Sometimes it may be time to choose between opposite paths; sometimes it may be time to stay the course and choose neither. In the moment of choosing, we move toward one experience and away from it‘s opposite. Choosing means that awareness continues to focus on one possible experience as opposed to its complementary experience. In most cases, choice, the exercise of free will, is ongoing. We‘re not committed to creating a possible experience by glancing at it just once or twice. We commit to creating an experience by continuing to focus our attention on it for a relatively long period of time. Intention functions both in the long-term creation of experience and in the immediate creation of experience, i.e., the experience we‘re having right now. The long-term function of intention is a group effort, inasmuch as we contribute to the growth and evolution of reality along with the rest of the planet and the rest of the universe. We have differing degrees of control over the creation of experience at this level. The immediate function of intention is in providing a context for experience as it‘s occurring right now, in the present moment. The immediate function of intention is an individual choice, like adding spice of one type or another to whatever food we‘ve harvested and are cooking to eat. We have total individual control over the creation of our experience at this level. To return to the traffic analogy, if someone cuts us off in traffic, we have no control over the external event as it happens (although it‘s possible that, through prior intention, we contributed more or less to creating the reality that‘s the external event). What we do have complete control over is the intentional context, positive or negative, within which we experience that event as an individual being. That intentional context is the force of consciousness, the force of will, we add to the experience in the present moment. It‘s the force of our intention in the present moment that determines how we feel emotionally about an external event and how we react to it. This presentmoment intention is also what we‘re contributing to the creation of realities that will present themselves to us as experiences in the future. Imagine that we‘re in a small pool of water splashing around. The splashes we make create waves, and those waves eventually reach the edge of the pool and bounce back to us. Each time we make a splash, we‘re using the force of our intention in the present moment. Once we‘ve made the splash, there‘s nothing we can do about it, and off it goes to return at a later time. In this same pool are many other people splashing around. The waves we make and the waves they make combine to form the reality that eventually impacts us, creating the form of our experience. This combination of waves is intention functioning in the long-term creation of experience, as a group effort. Intention at this level creates the form and shape of our experience, but the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 520 experience isn‘t complete, isn‘t truly chosen, chewed, or consumed by our awareness, until we color it in or spice it up with the force of our intention in the present moment. Intention is always happening now, in the immediacy of the present moment. Even when we envision a future experience, our intention is happening now. The power of intention to create our experience lies in the present moment—not in the past, not in the future, but right now. Our present-moment intention is coloring (or flavoring) the reality we experience now and shaping the reality we‘ll experience in the future. It‘s no use worrying about what we intended in the past, for we no longer have control over that. Although an intention we had five years ago (or perhaps five lifetimes ago) may have helped to shape an experience we‘re having now, the only thing that matters now, the only thing we have control over now, is the intention we have right now, the type of spice, positive or negative, we‘re adding to our harvested experience. If we direct the force of our consciousness as a positive intention in the present moment, the chains of the past can‘t bind us, and the future will take care of itself. More than that we can‘t do. No matter what form our current experiences are taking, we create our immediate experiential environment according to the nature of our present-moment intention, according to the waves we‘re currently creating as we splash around in the ocean of consciousness. The reality we‘ve helped to create returns to us in a certain form, and we, as individual beings, each color it in, spice it up in our own way with our present-moment intention, to turn the form of that reality into a unique personal experience. We‘re bound to the past, to the karma of the past, only inasmuch as we choose to be bound to it. We must eventually experience the realities we‘ve created, but we still get to choose how we‘ll experience those realities when they return to us—i.e., within a positive or negative intentional context. If we helped to create a monster, we must experience the monster, but we still get to choose how we approach the monster, we still get to choose our attitude toward the monster. Our present-moment intention is really all that matters, for that‘s all there really is. Our presentmoment intention is what we are, acting as a force of creation. We are our will, our being that‘s in the process of becoming, the flow of consciousness, and we can choose freely, without hindrance or limitation, how to direct the force of our flow of consciousness in creating your experiences—i.e., with the flow or against the flow, constructively or destructively, positively or negatively. Think of our free will as a waterhose that we can spray this way or that in our garden for growing experiences. The force of the flow is our will, and once we direct that flow, it becomes intention, capable of inducing the experience-plants to grow. Spraying water one way is a positive intention; spraying water the opposite way is a negative intention. Direct our attention this way, and we water one kind of experience-plant; direct our attention the other way, and we water the opposite kind of experience-plant. Which type of experience-plant will grow and ripen into our actualized experience depends on where we spend the most time watering with our intention. Each time we focus our attention on a possible experience, the force of our intention goes in that direction and acts to develop that experience. At any moment, we can turn from one type of experience to the other, choose to water what-is or what-is-not. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 521 It‘s impossible to create an experience for yourself unintentionally, i.e., without using intention. Experiences can be created when the intention is hidden from our view, but not without intention itself. At some level of our individual being, there‘s always the awareness of intention. If intention is hidden, it‘s because we‘ve hidden it from ourself, and the part of our awareness that‘s doing the hiding knows the intention. This could then be called ―unconscious intention,‖ except that this then makes it sound as if such intention is devoid of consciousness, when it‘s really nothing but consciousness. If our intention is hidden from ourself, we remain responsible for the choice nonetheless. If our intention is hidden, it‘s we who hold the veil, it‘s we who‘ve chosen to hide it from ourself. If we put on a blindfold and go racing in a car down the street, we remain responsible for any damage we cause. ―I‘m not responsible because I couldn‘t see where I was going‖ isn‘t a valid excuse, because the reality is that at some level we chose to be blindfolded, chose not to see where we were going, chose not to see the nature of the experiences we were creating. At some level of our individual being, we chose a negative intention, chose to use the negative intention called ignorance. Most people think of experience as something that just happens to them, something they just observe. Likewise, science used to think that the experience of physical reality was something that just happened, something the scientist just observed. Science is beginning to learn that the experience of reality is created in part by the experiencer, and people are starting to learn that their experience of reality is created in part by their own force of consciousness, by their own intentions. We all know that how we feel physically after we eat something isn‘t due to the form or shape of what we‘ve eaten; what‘s important is what‘s in what we‘ve eaten. For this reason, when we‘re cooking food to eat, we choose our ingredients accordingly. Likewise, if we can realize that it‘s the intention, not the action, that causes us to feel good or bad, emotionally healthy or sick, we can then begin to choose our intentions accordingly, thereby creating healthier emotional experiences for ourself and for those around us. Choose positively often enough and consistently enough, and we‘ll eventually create for ourself the experience of heaven. Choose negatively often enough and consistently enough, and we‘ll eventually create for ourself the experience of hell. The choice is ours. 6.2 Free will and action Free will is our ability to choose an intention, positive or negative. However, since, more often than not, we‘ve hidden our intention from ourself, all we‘re aware of is our action, leading us to mistakenly believe that free will is our ability to choose to perform this or that action. Intention determines action. Our will is the flow of our individual being, the flow of the force of our consciousness, in relation to the larger flow. Intention is the flow of our will directed with or ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 522 against the larger flow of existence as our awareness creates experiences for itself. Once our flow is directed with or against the larger flow of existence, thus becoming intention, action follows based on that intention, as depicted in figure 101. + __ will + __ intention action Figure 101 (Left) A positive intention (flow) turns the pinwheel one way. (Right) A negative intention (flow) turns it the opposite way. Just as the motion of the pinwheel is determined by which tube the water comes out, our actions are determined by whether we choose to power our actions with a positive or a negative intention. Thus, while we control our intentions directly, depending on how we choose to apply the force of our consciousness, we don‘t control our actions directly, because action is determined by the flow of intention. Also (right), if our intention is hidden, all we‘re aware of is the action, which makes it seem as if free will is the ability to control action directly. We can exercise direct control over ourself only at the level of intention, not at the level of action. Once the force of intention has been directed with or against the larger flow of existence, that force flows through our bodies, and action follows indirectly. Our bodies move, perform actions, on the basis of the direction in which we intend that flow, just as a pinwheel moves on the basis of the direction of the water that flows past it. Action is only the most superficial part of a process that flows from a much deeper source. However, often we try to control our actions directly, by applying an opposite force, by trying to make the pinwheel spin the other way once the force of intention has already been applied. Again, we attempt this because we don‘t see that we control the action only at the level of intention. We see only the action. If we feel compelled to perform an action we know is bad for us, instead of changing the original action at the level of intention, instead of choosing a different intention, we use an opposite force of intention to create an opposite action to try and stop the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 523 original action. This creates stress and self-division for the awareness performing such a maneuver. We eat or drink too much, and we want to stop, yet we continue with the action. The intention, once applied, is unstoppable; action must result. Trying to stop ourself from performing an action once we have chosen the intention requires constant effort, a continuous counterforce, and eventually we tire. To change our actions, we must change our intentions. To change negative behaviors, we must find their root in some negative intention. Let‘s say that we find ourself poking ourself in the face with a pointed stick. All of a sudden, our right arm shoots up, and we jab ourself. This hurts. Yet our right arm continues, on occasion, to jab us. We can‘t see why this is happening; the intention is hidden, yet we want to stop ourself from doing this. So, the next time our right arm starts to come up, we use our left arm to stop it. The intention of our left arm is clear: we intend to stop our right arm from hurting us, and so the action of our left arm follows from that intention. However, the intention of our right arm isn‘t clear; all we see is the action. As long as our left arm holds our right arm, our right arm can‘t complete its action. However, as soon as our left arm relaxes or gets tired, our right arm completes its action, and we end up jabbing ourself anyway. This is essentially what‘s happening when we try to control ourself, to use free will, at the level of action. It‘s ineffective and inefficient. Furthermore, it‘s self-divisive, because it pits us against ourself, in opposition to ourself, since the only way to oppose an action born of intention is to apply an opposite intention. The self-opposition that occurs when we try to control ourself at the level of action creates stress within our awareness. To truly stop an action, the force that drives the action must be changed at the source, at the level of intention. In this effort there‘s no self-opposition, no self-division; there‘s just the flow of our consciousness directed differently, rather than pitted against itself. 6.21 The stress of controlling our actions The only truly free will is the will that‘s controlling its intentions. Attempts to control the creation of experience at the level of action creates self-division and stress. The exercise of free will to attempt to control action is never free, for in doing so, our will becomes bound to maintain a certain position. Wrestling involves trying to pin an opponent by making them move in a certain way. Any position we have our opponent in requires that we also maintain a certain position. Our efforts to use free will to control our actions are like wrestling with ourself. In using free will to control our actions, we‘re trying to make ourself go in a certain direction by holding ourself in a certain position, and as a consequence we must maintain a controlling position. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 524 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience By attempting to use free will to control action, awareness can literally tie itself into a knot, while it also binds itself to the experience of what-is-not. In this way, by attempting to control its actions directly, awareness chains itself—i.e., awareness literally creates a chain of command by which it‘s bound. The more awareness tries to control itself or the surrounding reality through action rather than intention, the more links there are in the chain. The more links there are in the chain, the more tightly awareness becomes bound, and the more constrained, restricted, and inflexible awareness then becomes. This situation creates a controlling relational structure within awareness, as depicted in figure 102. controller controlled I I I controller controlled I controller controlled controller controlled controller controlled I I I I controller controlled I I I I Figure 102 The development of multiple levels of control within awareness, which are created as a controller aspect of awareness dualizes in order to exert control upon itself, upon its own actions (rather than intentions), thereby forming a chain of control through repetitive and progressive self-relation. The three diagrams at the top show awareness dualizing three times, thereby forming three controller/controlled relationships, as depicted by the differently patterned spheres. The three diagrams at the bottom depict those relationships in terms of the control or force that awareness exerts upon itself through those relationships. The cross-hatched sphere represents the first level of control, the horizontally patterned sphere the second level of control, and the vertically patterned sphere the third level of control. In the second level of control, the controller aspect of awareness created in the first level of control itself dualizes into a controller/controlled relationship. In the third level of control, the controller aspect of awareness created in the second level of control itself dualizes into a controller/controlled relationship. This process can go on endlessly, creating a chain of self-control, a chain of command, within awareness. By developing these multiple levels of control, this chain of command, awareness becomes locked into certain positions, becomes bound to act in certain ways. There‘s no freedom in this situation. There‘s an inflexibility that results the more we try to control ourself at the level of action rather than intention. As the whole awareness becomes more inflexible, as it develops more and more levels of control within itself, it becomes increasingly prone to experience stress. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 525 Stress, as the term is used in physics, refers to an applied force or system of forces that tends to strain or deform a body, i.e., any object or structure. The more inflexible something is, the more prone it is to stress. A force applied to a flexible body will bend the body but not cause strain or deform it, i.e., permanently change its shape. That same force applied to an inflexible body can deform it, permanently changing its shape, or even cause it to break. In terms of an awareness that has created within itself a knotted chain of command, the ―body‖ that‘s subjected to stress is the relational structure of awareness itself, as that structure has been formed through the controlling relationships within itself. The more extensive this chain of command, the more tightly bound the awareness is to a certain course of action, and the more rigid and inflexible its structure will be, making it more prone to experience stress. Conversely, the fewer levels of control that exist within awareness, the less tightly bound the awareness is to a certain course of action, and the more flexible its structure will be, making it less prone to experience stress. The forces that can act upon this controlling relational structure of awareness as stressors are simply the circumstances of life we encounter from day to day and from moment to moment. The more tightly bound our awareness is to a certain course of action by our chain of command, the more rigid we are, and the more prone we are to being stressed by the circumstances of life. What we need to understand is that stress isn‘t something that exists by itself, without our tacit approval and cooperation. Stress is a relationship, a relationship between a force and a structure. Thus, in order for stress to exist, there must be both an applied force and a structure to which that force is applied. Whether or not the force is able to act as a stressor, and the degree to which it acts as a stressor, depend primarily on the nature of the structure that force encounters, not on the force itself. When a force meets a flexible body, stress is minimized. When that same force meets a rigid body, stress is maximized. The force is the same; the difference between minimal or maximal stress is in the flexibility or rigidity, respectively, of the structure that force encounters. Thus, whether or not we experience stress as the result of our encounters with the circumstances of life is primarily dependent on our degree of rigidity or flexibility, which itself is dependent on the degree to which we‘ve become bound by our attempts at exerting self-control at the level of action rather than intention. Being bound to a certain course of action means that not only is awareness determined to get to a certain place, but also that it‘s trying to get there in a certain way. Nothing is more determined to get where it‘s going than a river, yet nothing is more flexible than water. The desire and determination of awareness to experience wholeness are part of its flow, intrinsic to its being, just as the desire and determination of a river to flow downstream is intrinsic to its being. The river doesn‘t know what it will encounter around the next bend, yet it takes whatever course presents itself. Nor do we know what circumstances we will encounter around the next bend, yet unlike the river, we often find ourself unable to accept the course that presents itself. Accepting ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 526 circumstances doesn‘t mean that we have to like them, only that we don‘t try to deny the reality of their existence. Circumstances are literally the situations that surround us. Circum = encircle or surround, and stance = where we stand. A circumstance is then by its nature a situation that‘s acting as a sort of barrier, surrounding us. Thus, not all situations are circumstances. Circumstances are those situations that seem to have us trapped. A situation that doesn‘t make us feel trapped is simply an event, i.e., e-vent, literally an existential vent or opening. Circumstances become events once we find the door leading out of them. It‘s only once we accept that a situation exists that we then become capable of changing it, of turning a negative experience into a positive experience. We won‘t try to walk through a door that we believe is a wall, and we won‘t try to change a situation or circumstance that we‘re pretending doesn‘t exist. As long as we deny the existence of a circumstance, we remain trapped in that circumstance by our own denial of it. Every circumstance is an opportunity to grow, for within every circumstance lies a door that leads to greater understanding and self-awareness. However, that door remains hidden until we accept the existence of the circumstance. Deny the existence of the circumstance, and we also deny the existence of the door that circumstance contains. Accept the existence of the circumstance, and the door appears automatically. The inflexibility of awareness and its accompanying proneness to stress occur as awareness exerts multiple levels of control upon the flow of its existence in an attempt to get downstream in a certain way, along a predetermined course of action. By establishing this chain of command, awareness then becomes unable to change its controlling posture when other circumstances arise, causing the relatively inflexible controlling relational structure of awareness to be stressed by those altered circumstances. There will always be bumps in the road of life. The question is, are we flexible enough so that when we inevitably do hit those bumps, we can absorb the impact; or have we become so rigidly controlling that they can fracture us or cause us to ―get bent out of shape‖? Somewhere along the road of life, we got the idea that the way to happiness or contentment was to never be disturbed, and the way to never be disturbed was to never hit a bump. So, we spend our time trying to steer ourself around all the bumps we see coming, both real and imagined. This steering involves the attempt to use free will to control action, as we try to manage all eventualities. Maintaining this control causes us to be rigid and inflexible, and this inflexibility makes the bumps all the more stressful. This stress, in turn, makes the need to avoid those bumps seem more imperative, causing us to multiply our levels of self-control, thereby increasing the inflexibility of our awareness, which then increases the stress we experience when we inevitably do hit one of those bumps—and on and on it goes. There are two types of stress, tension and compression. Thus, at times we feel torn, under tension; and at other times we feel overwhelmed, under pressure or compression, depending on what we perceive as the primary force of stress that‘s being applied to the controlling relational structure of our awareness. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 527 When the circumstances of life seem to be pulling us in opposite directions, the controlling relational structure of our awareness is subjected to tensile stress, and we experience this stress as tension. Conversely, when the circumstances of life seem to be pushing upon us from opposite directions, the controlling relational structure of our awareness is subjected to compressive stress, and we experience this stress as pressure. Thus, at times we say, ―I feel the weight of the world on my shoulders‖ or ―I feel overwhelmed‖ or ―I feel under such pressure,‖ while at other times we say, ―I feel torn‖ or ―I feel like I‘m being pulled in two directions,‖ depending on how the external and internal circumstances of life are being applied to the controlling relational structure of our awareness. What we need to become aware of is that we ourself determine to some degree, through our own controlling posture, the level of stress we experience as a result of our encounters with the circumstances of life. Life is what it is, things happen as they happen, and most of these things are out of our present control. For although we create our own experiences, much of what currently happens to us is the result of previous intentions returning to us in the form of experiences. The only thing we have control over is our current intentions (literally, the flow of our will). We can‘t directly control experiences that come to us on the basis of past intentions; we can control only our current intentions with regard to those experiences. By trying to control circumstances through action rather than intention, we become trapped in a cycle of increasing stress, increasing control, and increasing self-division and thus experience increasing pain, increasing discontent, and an increasing lack of fulfillment. Because we‘re unaware of the mechanism by which stress occurs, we think stress comes from ―out there,‖ outside ourself. Part of stress does come from out there as a force acting upon us, but the other component, the component that determines the level of stress, is our own degree of flexibility or rigidity in terms of the controlling posture our awareness is trying to maintain. We‘re unaware of the mechanism by which we become prone to stress for the same reason we‘re prone to stress—i.e., because we‘ve inadvertently trapped ourself in a controlling relational structure wherein our awareness is experientially and thus functionally separated from itself and so remains unaware of the big picture, unable to understand the overall situation and the position it‘s in. In this structure, we lose sight of our intentions, and all we see are our actions. As long as we think stress is purely a function of what‘s ―out there,‖ we‘re powerless to stop it or modify it, and we then become its victim. As long as we blame our stress completely on the circumstances of life, we‘re literally ―being lame,‖ literally disabling ourself from being able to do anything about our stress, since we don‘t see ourself as in any way responsible for it. As long as we look ―out there‖ for the source of our stress, we‘re looking in the wrong place, because its source is ―in here,‖ where we are, in the controlling posture we‘ve set up and then become bound to maintain within our awareness. The wind is what it is. The flexible tree bends with the wind and so feels little, if any, stress, while the rigid tree finds the wind stressful. The rigid tree blames the wind for the stress it feels ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 528 when the wind is just being itself. The rigidity of the tree is itself responsible for the tree‘s experience of stress. The flexible tree is able to enjoy the wind, to dance with the wind, because it doesn‘t resist the wind. The circumstances of life are like the wind; they‘re just being what they are. We can dance with them, or we can resist them, but if we resist them, we shouldn‘t blame them for the stress we feel, for it‘s we who have, through our choices, put ourself in that position. As awareness, we exist in relation to, but not actually separable from, the flow of existence. In existing in relation to that flow, we‘re like a person in a boat, defined by the boat in relation to the river, yet still existing within the context of the river. The more awareness experientially takes itself out of the flow of existence through self-division, the more necessary paddling (i.e., control of action) seems to become. This situation arises because the more experientially disconnected awareness becomes from the flow of existence, from what it really is, the more unknown and unexperienceable the river becomes. The more unknown and unexperienceable the river becomes, the more awareness feels the need to control its actions in order to avoid possible danger. Conversely, if awareness understands its connection to the river, to the flow of existence, then awareness will have faith in the river, will trust the river as an aspect of itself and, having faith in the river, will accept what the river brings and where the river takes it. Understanding the part we play in creating experience and stress, understanding that all our experiences have the potential to guide us to greater awareness, doesn‘t eliminate the pain we feel when someone we love is lost or injured, or when some other horrible circumstance arises. However, understanding can modify the nature of the pain, make it more tolerable, less stressful, and so less painful. Furthermore, understanding can allow us to approach negative experiences with positive intentions, and thus use the negative experiences as seeds for creating positive experiences. Otherwise, if we fail to understand, we usually approach negative experiences with negative intentions, in which case the negative experiences act as seeds for creating more negative experiences. 6.22 Attempting to escape control Much of what we see as the self-destructive nature of addictions represent an attempt by awareness to escape the controlling relational structure it has built in attempting to control itself at the level of action rather than intention. Awareness, finding itself trapped by itself, imprisoned by itself, then attacks itself as it tries to disable its jailer, which is itself. When someone overeats, overdrinks, or uses drugs, we say they lack self-control. The irony is that these self-destructive actions are oftentimes the twisted byproducts of excessive attempts at self-control at the level of action rather than intention. People use drugs, including alcohol, because for a while these things in some way disable the controller awareness and so eliminate the stress associated with this self-control, relieve their pain, and in this way make them feel good. Drugs, a.k.a. ―mind-altering substances,‖ by altering our awareness, change the way we usually perceive or conceive reality, and so for a time this unusual perception or conception changes the internal dynamic of control that‘s based on our ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 529 usual perception or conception. Therefore, while on drugs, we don‘t feel the need to control ourself in the same way or to the same degree, and so the stress and pain we were feeling because of this ongoing control are temporarily relieved. Thus, people on drugs seem to be ―out of control‖ because that‘s exactly what they are, having stepped out of their usual control mechanisms. The problem is, once the drug wears off, the control mechanisms reestablish themselves, and the stress and pain experienced by awareness now feel even more intense in relation to the temporary relief associated with drug use. Therefore, there‘s now an even-greater need for relief from the stress and pain of self-control, and so there‘s now an even-stronger desire for whatever drug was used to gain such relief. With each use of the drug, with each episode of temporary relief, this desire becomes stronger, increasing the likelihood of another usage. This is the vicious cycle of addiction. In using drugs for the purpose of temporarily relieving ourself from the stress and pain of selfcontrol, what can happen is that another, even more destructive level of self-control can be created in attempting to control all the other levels of self-control. On the surface, drugs seem to free us from the stress and pain of self-control. However, in order to free ourself from one control mechanism, we use another control mechanism, and the drug itself can then become the controller, or the controlling factor, in one‘s life. This situation is another example of how any effort at self-control at the level of action, through whatever means, can never free us from the accompanying experience of stress and pain. Drugs are called a crutch, but they‘re really only the illusion of a crutch. A crutch allows us to walk until we heal, and once we‘ve healed, we can put the crutch away and walk as we did before. A drug can enable us to walk for a while, temporarily relieving the pain of self-division, but when we try to put it away, we find it even more difficult to walk than before, and so we use it again, until eventually we find that we can‘t walk at all without it. Drugs come in many forms other than tablets, liquids, or powders. Money can be a drug, power can be a drug, sex can be a drug, food can be a drug, gambling can be a drug, commercial products can be a drug. Anything can function as a drug, i.e., as a control mechanism used to temporarily disable other control mechanisms and thus temporarily relieve our awareness from the stress and pain of self-control. Like the circumstances of life that seem to cause our stress, the harm isn‘t in the drug itself but in the way it‘s used. Most drugs also have beneficial purposes. For example, opium derivatives are widely used as analgesics, and the active ingredient in marijuana decreases nausea. However, when used to relieve the stress and pain of self-control, these substances can become selfdestructive if a cycle of addiction ensues. The trick is to find a means of relieving the stress and pain of self-control that‘s not itself selfdestructive, or self-controlling, and thereby to some degree allow awareness to step out of the cycle of increasing stress. Toward this end, creative activities often work well, because while creating, if we create properly, by going with the flow of our existence, by letting the creative ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 530 juices move as they will, we‘re released from self-control. In this way, we find an activity that is self-constructive rather than self-destructive. Creativity is a relief and a release precisely because, while truly creating, we‘re not controlling our actions but just being, going with the flow. Meditation, yoga, and certain forms of physical exercise also work well, as long as they‘re not forced—i.e., as long as they release us from self-control and aren‘t just another task imposed by a controller awareness. In a way, we‘re all trapped like Atlas with the world on his shoulders. Atlas is trapped by the idea that the world needs him to stay on course, just as we‘re trapped by the idea that our lives need constant control to stay on track. In the process of exercising free will at the level of action, we lose freedom, we become restricted. In the process of trying to control where our world goes, our world controls where we go. The more we try to control our actions, rather than our intentions, the more we become controlled. It‗s only by controlling ourself at the level of intention, rather than at the level of action, that we become truly free, free to go where we really and truly, in the deepest level of our being, desire to go. Section 7 Moving Naturally Against Our Nature In its most fundamental state, existence is inseparable from itself. In any state of being, existence is actually inseparable from itself, for all experience of existential separation is ultimately unreal, having no independent foundation, no actual basis in what-is as it is. Nonseparation is thus natural, or the nature of existence; separation is unnatural, or not the nature of existence. Therefore, the experience of any separability of existence from itself is in this regard unnatural, or against our nature. Thus, our continued movement deeper and deeper into experiential division is also unnatural, or against our nature. However, all movement must be natural, even when it appears to be unnatural. It can‘t be any other way, for all movement is ultimately the movement of what-is as it is, as a self-expression of its nature. In this subsection, we will examine the paradox between what appears to be our unnatural movement into the dimension of what-is-not, into experiential division, and why this apparently unnatural movement must in some more fundamental way be our nature—i.e., we will examine why it‘s actually our nature to be unnatural. 7.1 Biting into the apple of knowledge If it‘s our nature to move toward unity, toward what-is, then why do we ever move toward experiential division, toward what-is-not, to begin with? The situation of our first movement into the dimension of what-is-not is reflected in the biblical story of the Garden of Eden, where Adam and Eve eat the apple of knowledge and, in so doing, get themselves tossed out of paradise. In paradise, Adam and Eve exist in union with God. In paradise, all their desires are fulfilled, and they know not want or longing. Thus, paradise is a metaphor for the awareness of existential connection or unity. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 531 The apple of knowledge is a metaphor for awareness‘ definition and experience of itself as ―I,‖ the knower, seemingly separate from ―it,‖ the known, which definition and experience first occur as awareness moves into a reflected experiential reality. If awareness wants to know the apple as other than its own existence, then awareness must move into the dimension of what-is-not and so create the illusion that what exists as the apple is separate from what awareness itself is. Knowing is a form of experience. To know something, we must first exist in relation to it; then, as we interact with it and it becomes defined in relation to us, and we in relation to it, there‘s the experience of knowing. The type of experience that is knowing is by nature divisive. It‘s no coincidence that the word know sounds like the word no. To know is literally to ―no,‖ to experience existence as what-is-not, as defined, bordered, and so experientially separate. Biting into the apple of knowledge is, then, a metaphor for the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not. This movement is what creates the first experience of existential separation, as awareness experiences itself as an ―I‖ separate from another as ―it.‖ This experience of an apparent separation between ―I‖ and ―it‖ is what causes awareness to conceive the need for self-control at the level of action. Before biting into the apple of knowledge—i.e., before moving into the dimension of what-isnot—awareness existed in full awareness of its unity with, and its inseparability from, all that exists, and thus in communion (literally, ―common-union‖) with God as the expression of that awareness of existential unity. This is paradise, this is heaven. Once awareness sees the apple of knowledge as something it wants, as something other than what it is, then awareness has wandered into the dimension of what-is-not and so is no longer able to experience the paradise of existential unity. Awareness, having wandered into the dimension of what-is-not, instead experiences the perpetual want, longing, discontent, and relative hell of experiential division— i.e., awareness experiencing itself as separate from the rest of existence. If we want to stay in paradise we can‘t eat the apple of knowledge, the apple of no-ing. This isn‘t a command or a threat, it‘s just a statement of fact, i.e., a statement of the fact that we can‘t be in opposite and so mutually exclusive existential states simultaneously. If we want to stay in paradise, aware of our connection to existence, then we can‘t define ourself as separate from existence. If we want to remain aware of existential unity as the ultimate reality then we can‘t be aware of existential division as the ultimate reality. Biting into the apple of knowledge (which could also be called the apple of experiential division) is described as humanity‘s fall from grace. To be graceful is to move fluidly, in harmony with what-is, inseparable from what-is. When we bite into the apple of knowledge, we fall from grace, our movements no longer graceful, no longer in harmony with what-is, as we try to control and wrestle with the flow of existence, having conceived ourself as separate from the river of existence. So far, all we‘ve done is explain how biting into the apple of knowledge is a metaphor for awareness‘ movement into the dimension of what-is-not. The question still remains, why does ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 532 awareness bite into the apple of knowledge and so lose sight of paradise? What first impels awareness to move into the dimension of what-is-not? What first impels awareness to move from a natural position of unity into an unnatural experience of division? In the Bible, this action is interpreted as Adam and Eve disobeying God’s command. Eve is tempted by the Devil, disguised as a snake, to eat the apple, even though God has told them this is the one thing forbidden to them in all of paradise. Once they eat the apple, God then tosses them out of paradise as punishment for their sin of disobedience. This eating of the apple against the command of God is called original sin. It‘s regarded as the first mistake that estranges humanity from God that separates humanity from God. This sin or mistake that results in the estrangement of humanity from God is a metaphor for awareness‘ experience of itself as separate from the rest of existence. Thus, this biblical story of humanity‘s fall from grace is consistent with the results of the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, since the experience of an ―it‖ that appears to be separate from ―I‖ is the first experience that awareness has of existence as separable from itself. However, although the result of the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not is consistent with the biblical story, there are problems of consistency with regard to the biblical interpretation of the motivation Adam and Eve had for eating the apple of knowledge, for the motivation behind this first movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not. In the Bible, biting into the apple of knowledge is regarded as a mistake, as disobedience to God, as sin. This is a metaphor for seeming to go against our nature, moving in opposition to the will or flow of existence. It‘s true that this movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, into experiential division, seems to be counter to the will or flow of God (as a representation of the totality of existence) and, in this way, against our nature. However, in the Garden of Eden, an experiential division already seems to be operating within existence even before the apple is eaten. In the Garden of Eden, God is the controller, and Adam and Eve are the controlled. This controller/controlled relationship (also called the creator/created relationship) indicates that there must be an already-present experiential division. Such an already-present experiential division is inconsistent with the state of paradise and existential unity that‘s supposed to have existed before the apple was eaten, or before the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, into the divisive experience of knowing. What we‘re presently trying to discern is what could motivate awareness to move into a state where it experiences itself as somehow separate from the rest of existence. So, to assess the eating of the apple of knowledge, the first movement of awareness into the dimension of what-isnot, as a mistake, as disobedience, as sin, on the basis of a divisive controller/controlled relationship, would be inconsistent with the previous state of existential unity from which such a movement must occur. Before the apple was eaten, there was the awareness of existential unity; after the apple was eaten, there wasn‘t. So, the first movement of awareness into an experience of existential separation must occur from a position of existential unity—i.e., this movement must occur in full consciousness, awareness, and understanding of the condition such a movement will produce. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 533 The first movement of awareness into an experience of existential separation can‘t be treated as a mistake, because before that movement, there simply exists no context for making such a mistake. A mistake (literally, ―miss-take‖) is a movement or action taken out of an erroneous or incomplete awareness of the way things are, causing that action to not turn out the way it was intended. Before the first movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, the relative unawareness and ignorance that are the basis for making such a mistake wouldn‘t yet exist. Likewise, the first movement of awareness into an experience of existential separation can‘t be treated as disobedience to God, because before that movement, there simply exists no context for such disobedience. Before and beyond awareness‘ movement into the dimension of what-is-not, existence is unified, and creator and created are inseparable. There‘s then nothing and no one for awareness to disobey, since the context within which awareness experiences the divisive controller/controlled relationship doesn‘t yet exist. By treating eating the apple of knowledge as something bad, as a mistake, as disobedience to God, as sin, the Bible must assume that this action was taken out of ignorance, out of unawareness, and so within the context of an already-present experiential division. Yet how could this action be taken out of ignorance if Adam and Eve were in paradise, in union with God, in union with all that exists? If eating the apple of knowledge is itself the act that separates humanity from God, divides awareness from the rest of existence, then how could such an act be a mistake, or against the will of God, against the flow of existence, since such an action must originate from a position of existential unity? Therefore, although the biblical story of Adam and Eve being tossed out of paradise is an accurate metaphor for the first movement of awareness into an experience of existential separation—i.e., how awareness loses sight of existential unity, owing to knowing ―it‖ as apparently separate from ―I‖—the biblical story of Adam and Eve doesn‘t adequately or consistently address the question of the motivation for why awareness first bites into the apple of knowledge, for why awareness would first move into the dimension of what-is-not, into experiential division, and in this way seem to go against its nature as actually inseparable from the rest of existence. The first movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, into experiential division, can‘t be a mistake, can‘t be disobedience, can‘t be sin, because this movement must occur from a position of existential unity. This movement must be in some way consistent with the nature of existence to be whole, to be unified, to be what it is. But how can the first movement of awareness into experiential division be consistent with the natural movement of existence toward unity? When do brothers, sisters, or friends who love each other, who feel and recognize a connection between each other, agree to split up and oppose each other? Well, when they want to play a game and thereby enjoy themselves. They begin the game in full understanding that playing the game means that they‘ll oppose each other and, in so doing, act as if they‘re separate from each other. Yet they also fully understand that the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 534 opposition and apparent separation are neither permanent nor ultimately real but are only an illusion necessary for playing the game. We can understand how awareness can move into experiential division naturally, as part of its nature, only if we understand that this first movement of awareness into the dimension of whatis-not is taken in full awareness of the consequences. And we can understand the real nature of those consequences, and why it‘s in the nature of awareness to accept those consequences, only if we examine this first movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, and the ensuing drama, as a game that existence is playing with itself. The apple was put there in the first place to be eaten so that the game could begin. Adam and Eve are extensions of existence, and existence fully understands what‘s going to happen when they eat the apple of knowledge. That‘s why awareness eats it, because it understands that it will thereby become hidden from itself, and then it can have the fun of finding itself again. 7.2 The cosmic game Why does existence want to play a game with itself? Because it wants to enjoy itself. Why does existence want to enjoy itself? First, we must ask, what is enjoyment? To enjoy is to experience joy, to be surrounded by joy, to be permeated by joy. Joy is bliss, and bliss is the nature of existence. Sat-chit-ananda: existence, consciousness, bliss. Therefore, existence enjoying itself is existence surrounding itself with its own joy, its own intrinsic bliss, its own nature, which is the same as saying existence forming a relationship with itself. So, now we can ask, why does existence want to surround itself with its own joy, its own intrinsic bliss, its own nature? Perhaps only because that‘s what it‘s all about. Perhaps this desire is simply an aspect of its infinite nature. At some point, there‘s no proximal cause, no motivation, no why or wherefore, only what-is being that. Here, we‘ll just say that it‘s the nature of existence to enjoy itself, to surround itself with itself, to exist in relation to itself, and so the universe happens, spontaneously, without forethought, without planning, as part of the natural movement of existence in that direction, in the direction of enjoyment, in the direction of selfrelation. No purpose, no reason—just existence being what it is, naturally, without effort. However, existence, in being moved by nature to enjoy itself, is limited by its own infinity, is constrained by its own singularity. Have you ever tried to play monopoly or any other game by yourself? It‘s not much fun, because you always know what you‘re going to do next. What fun is hide-and-seek if you always know where the other player is hiding? Existence is in the same position. How can existence play a game and enjoy itself if it‘s the only player? For existence to enjoy itself, to play a game with itself, it must create the illusion of opponents, of two players who aren‘t connected. So, what does existence do? It hides from itself so that there seem to be two separate players when there‘s really only one. How does existence hide from itself? By moving ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 535 into the dimension of what-is-not, where the one player as ―I‖ seems to be separate from the other player as ―it.‖ The relational structure of existence that‘s been described in this work is a unified model of existence in the process of enjoying itself, in the process of experiencing its own joy, its own intrinsic bliss, its own nature. Because this process of enjoyment is somewhat analogous to what happens when two people play a game together, the stages in the evolution of existence into experience can be related to the steps necessary in order to play a game. What‘s the first step in playing a game? Having more than one player. Even in solitaire, we have an opponent, for we play against the deck of cards. So, before the game can begin, existence must exist in relation to itself so that there‘ll be enough players to play the game. What‘s the next step in playing a game? Once there are enough players, then the players, the eventual opponents, must first agree on what game they‘ll play. So, before the game can begin, there must be agreement between the players, there must be cooperation between the eventual opponents. At this stage in the evolution of existence into experience, although existence already exists in relation to itself, the relational aspects of existence remain aware of their inseparability and interconnection. It‘s only later, within the context of experience—specifically, within the context of the experience of what-is-not—that the relational aspects of existence lose sight of their connection to the whole. What‘s the next step in playing a game? Setting up the gameboard or playing field, defining the boundaries of play, determining the rules of play. The successive dualization of existence into a relational matrix represents setting up the playing field, defining the boundaries of play, and determining the rules of play. What‘s the next step in playing a game once the game, the playing field, and the rules of play have been established? Splitting up into opposing players, or into opposing teams. Is this a mistake? No! It‘s done on purpose, so that we can have the fun of playing a game, of interacting with our friends, or, in the case of the cosmic game, so that existence can interact with and enjoy itself. In this step, in board games, the players choose pieces or characters of different shapes and colors. This step of picking pieces or characters represents the differentiation of the relational matrix into primary and compound distortion processes. Once all of this preparation has been done, the cosmic game is almost ready to begin, but not quite, because even with all of this preparation, the players in this game are still aware that they‘re a singular existence. In order for the game to begin in earnest, one more step is necessary. In order for the competition and opposition to seem real, the illusion of separation between the players must be created. It‘s this step in preparing to play the game that represents the movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not. At this point, relative existence as awareness loses sight of its connection to the rest of existence, and the game can then begin in earnest. So, what game is it? What‘s the game that‘s being played? To me, it seems to be most like a game of hide-and-seek: existence hiding from itself so that it can find itself, and in the process of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 536 looking and finding, enjoying itself. For existence to reveal its own joy to itself, it must first conceal that joy from itself. In other words, for existence to reveal itself to itself, it must first conceal itself from itself. However, within the context of the cosmic game of hide-and-seek, there are an infinite number of other games being played. All of these other games are smaller games played within the context of the larger game of hide-and-seek. What game are you playing? Whatever game you want to play. The form that the game we each play takes depends on what we see as the gameboard—i.e., how we see reality arranged—and on the gamepiece we see ourself as using— i.e., how we define ourself in relation to the surrounding reality. Some people are playing monopoly, trying to possess as much material wealth as they can before they die. Others are playing chess, trying to put themselves in a position of power and control. All of these smaller games are extensions of the larger game, the cosmic game of hide-and-seek, whereby existence enjoys itself as it naturally seeks the fulfillment, completion, and wholeness of the experience of being connected to itself, the experience of being surrounded by its own joy, its own intrinsic bliss. Why do children love to play hide-and-seek? Why do infants love to play peek-a-boo? Perhaps because these activities are extensions of the same activity as that which got them here in the first place, as they take part in the cosmic game of hide-and-seek, or the game of ―now you see it, now you don‘t.‖ What‘s the first step in playing a game of hide-and-seek? Someone has to be the seeker and so close their eyes while the others go hide. At this point in the cosmic game, we‘re the seekers, and we‘ve closed our eyes by moving into the dimension of what-is-not. In this process, existence becomes hidden from itself, and the game begins. Existence says to itself, ―You turn around and close your eyes, and I‘ll go hide, and then you come and find me.‖ Turning around and closing our eyes means turning away from ourself, from what-is, by directing our attention and thus our awareness toward an experience of what-isnot. In this way, by experiencing what we are within the context of self-dividing boundaries, of defined realities, we experientially wall off our awareness from the rest of existence, and thereby literally close our ―I.‖ This is the motivation for the first movement of our awareness into the dimension of what-is-not, into experiential division. Some religions treat our presence and activity here on Earth as some sort of punishment for either ongoing or previous bad behavior. However, we don‘t come here and do this because we‘re bad or evil or mistaken or lost or disobedient, or for any reason that has a negative connotation. We come here and do this because we‘re existence in the process of enjoying itself, in the process of playing a game with itself, and this first movement of awareness into the dimension of what-is-not is a necessary step in the game. However, once our awareness begins to function within the twisted context of the dimension of what-is-not, our awareness becomes lost in relation to itself. Once awareness loses sight of what it is, awareness then moves in ways that are mistaken, in ways that increase its experience of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 537 existential separation, of self-division. Movements that increase the experience of existential separation are, by definition, bad or evil actions. Again, awareness itself is never bad or evil, but when awareness functions within the twisted context of the dimension of what-is-not, the chain of intention-action-reaction-result itself becomes twisted, causing results that are the opposite of awareness‘ deepest intention, which is to enjoy itself, to find itself, to reconnect with itself, to experience itself as it is, as intrinsically blissful. The reason why we tend to see this first movement of awareness into the dimension of what-isnot as bad or evil is precisely because we‘re seeing this movement from the perspective of whatis-not, where everything is topsy-turvy, seen as it‘s not, as negative. For this reason, the natural movement of existence in the process of enjoying itself appears as it‘s not, as negative, as existence punishing itself. We come into the world playful, full of joy; but as time goes on, we grow serious as we get more caught up in cycles of self-division and increasing stress. Life is no longer experienced as a game but instead becomes a task, a chore to be dealt with, a process to be controlled. Or, if life is treated as a game, the game is taken very seriously indeed, as if it ultimately matters who wins and who loses, and so it‘s then no longer really a game, it‘s no longer really done for the enjoyment of playing, but instead the goal becomes to win at any cost rather than to enjoy with no real cost. The best athlete wants his opponent at his best. The best general enters the mind of his enemy. The best businessman serves the communal good. The best leader follows the will of the people. All of them embody the virtue of noncompetition. Not that they don‘t love to compete, But they do it in the spirit of play. In this they are like children And in harmony with the Tao. Lao Tzu19 A game is something done for sheer enjoyment. In a true game, who wins and who loses doesn‘t matter, because the game is played for the sake of enjoying the interaction with the other players. In the case of existence, where there‘s really only one player, existence plays the cosmic game for the sake of enjoying itself, for the sake of experiencing the intrinsic bliss of its own nature. In a true game, the outcome of the game is irrelevant; what‘s important is the process of play itself, the enjoyment of interaction that the game provides. However, if the game in question is being played for the sole purpose of obtaining some tangible reward at the conclusion of the game—e.g., money, a trophy, the status of being ―number one‖— rather than for the enjoyment of playing, then winning, by definition, becomes the only thing, the only reason for playing the game. The more attached a player is to a particular outcome, the less 19 From the Tao Te Ching, translated by Stephen Mitchell, of Harper and Row, 1988. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 538 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience enjoyable playing the game will be. This is because if a player is attached to a particular outcome, then their attention will be focused on the outcome rather than on the game itself. How can we enjoy playing a game if we aren‘t paying any attention to it? If, on the other hand, the goal of the game is to enjoy playing, then the outcome becomes irrelevant. In a game that‘s nothing more than a game, the real winners are those who simply enjoy playing. In order to understand why winning and losing are ultimately irrelevant in terms of the cosmic game, we need to see how the players in the cosmic game, the perceived winners and losers, actually relate to each other, as depicted in figure 103. it I I it I it Figure 103 Different ways of depicting how existence is enjoying itself by existing in relation to itself. (Left) In the ouroboros symbol, the relationship in which existence enjoys itself is depicted as existence nourishing itself by consuming itself: The serpent eats its own tail and thus feeds itself, including the tail it‘s eating. (Middle) In the T’aichi T’u symbol, the relationship in which existence enjoys itself is depicted as existence penetrating itself: There‘s mutual interpenetration as the yin consumes the yang and vice versa, so that each sustains the existence of the other. (Right) The modified ouroboros symbol, in which two heads are depicted as consuming and nourishing each other, is a more accurate representation of our current situation and also is more in harmony with the balanced situation depicted in the T’ai-chi T’u symbol. In the modified ouroboros symbol, both mutual consumption and mutual interpenetration are depicted. In order to sustain ourself as a compound process—i.e., while we‘re alive—we must consume other aspects of existence, while as time goes on, we ourself are consumed by the ongoing dynamic of existence. Thus, while we consume, we‘re also being consumed. In these diagrams, in which an awareness of the unity underlying the experiential process is maintained, ―I‖ and ―it‖ are shown as they are, as interchangeable or existing as such only in relation to each other. An awareness of underlying unity doesn‘t eliminate the experience of ―I‖ and ―it,‖ doesn‘t eliminate the players in the game, but it does eliminate the basis on which ―I‖ can be seen to overcome or dominate ―it‖ as something separate from itself. Within the context of existential unity, the idea that existence can somehow be victorious by defeating itself has no basis and actually becomes quite absurd. Therefore, within the context of existential unity, there‘s no basis for awareness to become attached to winning, and no basis for awareness to fear ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 539 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience losing, since both outcomes are then seen as they are, as two sides of the same coin, rather than as separate, independently existent realities. Winning and losing are an experiential duality, two seemingly opposite experiences that actually exist as such only in relation to each other. Although existence is the basis of experience, existence exists independent of experience, and so existence is ultimately unaffected by the relative states of winning and losing. No matter what we experience as happening on the gameboard, existence always remains what it is. It‘s for this reason that awareness is able to begin the cosmic game by moving fearlessly into the dimension of what-is-not, into experiential division, into the inevitable experience of pain and suffering that such movement entails, because awareness does so at first with the understanding that it can never actually be separated from what it is, and therefore with the understanding that the pain and suffering of self-division are ultimately an illusion. However, once awareness enters the dimension of what-is-not, awareness then becomes unaware of the underlying unity of existence, as the apparent separation between ―I‖ and ―it‖ becomes its experience of reality. Once awareness loses sight of its connection to the rest of existence, instead of experiencing the situation as it is—i.e., the mutual coexistence of ―I‖ and ―it‖— awareness instead experiences the situation as it‘s not—i.e., as ―I‖ and ―it‖ existing in opposition to each other, as depicted in figure 104. it I it it I I it fight I aggression attempt to win ―I‖ and ―it‖ coexist experience of existential unity movement into what-is-not ―I‖ and ―it‖ opposed experience of existential separation I it attempt to not lose flight fear Figure 104 How existence as awareness experiences its relationship to the rest of existence once it has moved into the dimension of what-is-not. (Left) The modified ouroboros symbol depicts the situation before awareness moves into the dimension of what-is-not, as existence consuming itself, enjoying itself, experiencing itself, while remaining aware of underlying unity. (Middle) How awareness experiences this same situation once it has moved into the dimension of what-is-not, thereby becoming unable to experience (i.e., becoming unaware of) the unity underlying what it experiences as reality. This unawareness of the underlying unity of existence is depicted by the gray shading of the connection between the two mutually consuming heads. In this situation, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 540 in which existence is experienced as it‘s not, ―I‖ and ―it‖ are then experienced as separate and opposing realities rather than as the unified and coexistent realities that they actually are. Within this context, the process of mutual consumption and mutual coexistence is experienced as a situation of mutually exclusive existence, where ―I‖ and ―it‖ are seen to be in competition for continued existence. Within this context, the relative states of winning and losing are experienced as separate, independently existent realities, and awareness becomes attached to the idea of winning while also fearing the idea of losing. Functioning within this context as an experientially isolated ―I,‖ then either awareness takes on an aggressive posture and fights with the rest of existence as ―it,‖ trying to overcome ―it,‖ trying to beat ―it,‖ in order to win; or awareness runs from the rest of existence as ―it,‖ fearing ―it,‖ trying to avoid losing to ―it,‖ in an attempt to avoid the threatened nonexistence of ―I.‖ Trying to win and trying not to lose aren‘t the same action, although both actions arise from the same experience of existential separation and self-division. (Right) Whether awareness fights or flees from ―it‖ depends on which aspect of existence (i.e., ―I‖ or ―it‖) awareness sees as having the ability to overcome the other in a direct conflict. Either action is ultimately futile, for the mutually coexistent nature of relative existence is such that awareness can neither successfully overcome itself nor successfully run from itself. Either action is also counterproductive, since these actions only reinforce awareness‘ experience of existential separation. As previously discussed, once awareness experiences itself as ―I‖ within the twisted context of the dimension of what-is-not, awareness then becomes bound to defend the independent existence of this ―I,‖ since awareness then perceives any dissolution or diminishment of this ―I‖ as its own nonexistence. Awareness then fears any ―it‖ that‘s perceived as a threat to its ―I‖; in other words, awareness fears any ―it‖ that‘s seen to exist in conflict with or opposition to its definition and experience of itself as ―I.‖ Again, fear is the emotion that awareness experiences as it moves toward nonexistence. Although awareness can‘t actually cease to exist, awareness can experience itself as moving toward nonexistence once it defines itself as an experiencer, i.e., as ―I.‖ If we fear death, it‘s because we see death as nonexistence. If we see death as nonexistence, it‘s because we‘ve identified what we are with our organic physical experience of ourself, with our physical body. Once we identify what we are with our physical body, then we‘re bound to see death as the cessation of our own existence. People fear aging for the same reason, because they see it as movement toward death or nonexistence. Within the twisted context of the dimension of what-is-not, the natural and synergetic process of mutual consumption that sustains relative existence is seen as movement toward nonexistence, and so as something to be feared, and those who fear it are bound to try to avoid it. Such avoidance is futile, unnecessary, and counterproductive. For example, racism is based on fear. People with different physical attributes can easily be identified as other, as separate from what we are, as separate ―its.‖ Within this context, under even minimal environmental stress, these experientially separate others are seen as the monster ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 541 ―it‖ that threatens the existence of our ―I,‖ of our way of life, and so either they‘re attacked, resulting in racial violence, or they‘re run from, resulting in racial segregation. When we‘re aware of underlying unity, we see the cosmic game, the process of mutual consumption, as a process of mutual coexistence. When we‘re aware of underlying unity, we don‘t become attached to the idea of ourself as an impermanent experiential form, as our physical body. Within the context of existential unity, we‘re able to appreciate the process of living without fear, without the threat of impending doom or nonexistence, not having separated what we experience ourself to be from the rest of existence. However, when we become unaware of the underlying unity of existence, unaware of the unity underlying the experiential process, what we perceive as ―I‖ and ―it,‖ then we experience the cosmic game as conflict, and we see the inevitability of being consumed in that conflict as the threat of nonexistence. Within the context of this experience of self-division, we‘re bound to fear ―it,‖ we‘re bound fear the rest of existence, and we experience time as a monster that‘s slowly devouring us. So, we end up in the futile position of fighting with the rest of existence and struggling against time as we try to preserve what we experience as our own existence. Living in fear, we spend our lives either fighting with or avoiding the rest of existence rather than embracing it. Actually, we‘re always being embraced by existence, although we don‘t always see it that way, and so we don‘t always experience it that way. Because of the law of karma, we‘re bound to experience existence treating us as we‘ve treated it. If we fight with the rest of existence, then we‘ll experience existence as fighting back. If we run from the rest of existence, then we‘ll experience existence as running from us. If we embrace the rest of existence, then we‘ll experience existence as embracing us. In other words, experientially we get back from existence what we give to it. The underlying unity of existence doesn‘t change, but how we experience that unified reality depends on how we approach it. That is, how we experience our unbreakable connection to the rest of existence literally depends on how we as ―I‖ approach the rest of existence as ―it‖—i.e., either with open arms, with weapon in hand, or cowering in fear. And, of course, how we approach the rest of existence depends on whether we‘re moving within the dimension of what-is or what-is-not, within the context of existential unity or self-division. As stated previously, we can play any game we want within the overall context of the cosmic game of hide-and-seek. These days, a game many people play is called ―the rat race.‖ It‘s called that because it‘s analogous to a bunch of rats racing to get to a chunk of food before the other rats do, so that they can consume the largest portion. In this game, winning is seen as the continuation of existence, and losing is seen as nonexistence. For this reason, the players become attached to winning, and fear failure or losing. The players want to win because they naturally want to continue to exist. The players fear losing for the same reason, because it‘s their nature to continue to exist. How is it that in this game, the concept of winning becomes attached to continued existence, and the concept of losing becomes attached to nonexistence? The players in the rat race see winning ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 542 as maintaining control, as being allowed to maintain their position, their experience of what they are as ―I,‖ and so they see winning as necessary for the continued existence of ―I.‖ On the other hand, they see losing as a loss of control, as a situation where they don‘t get to maintain their position, as a situation where their ―I‖ is altered in some way, and so they see losing as something to be avoided in order that ―I‖ may continue to exist. It‘s impossible for us to not exist. We need make no effort to continue to exist. However, the degree to which we experience effort as necessary for our continued existence depends on how narrowly we define our existence. The more narrowly we define our existence, the more likely our possible nonexistence becomes, and the greater the apparent need to control ourself at the level of action becomes. Once we wander into the dimension of what-is-not and its attendant experience of existential separation, the gameboard then becomes arranged in such a way that any move we make in an attempt to win the cosmic game, to beat the rest of existence, can serve only to further reinforce the illusion of existential separation. In this situation, by trying to win, we lose, inasmuch as when we try to win, we become experientially lost to ourself. Actions always have the opposite effect of what we intend whenever those actions arise from intentions formed within the topsyturvy land of what-is-not. So, how does awareness get out of the cage of self-division once it has constructed it? How does awareness play the cosmic game without becoming endlessly trapped within the dimension of what-is-not? The only way is for awareness to, at some point, in some way, comprehend the existential unity underlying the game that it‘s playing, and so comprehend the situation it‘s in. Within the context of that comprehension, the impulse toward further mistaken movement ceases. By understanding the nature of the cosmic game, the playing field, and the rules of play, awareness then is able to move without continuing to create a twisted, self-divisive chain of intention-action-reaction-result. Once awareness learns to control itself at the level of intention, rather than at the level of action, awareness is able to recognize more clearly which movements go with the flow and which movements go against the flow. Once we understand the nature of the cosmic game, the playing field, and the rules of play, we can see the folly in trying to relieve an itching eye by scratching it with a stick, and so the impulse toward such an action simply doesn‘t occur. In this way, mistaken action ceases with no effort. Awareness doesn‘t need to apply an experientially self-divisive force of action in order to stop itself from acting mistakenly. Rather, awareness stops acting mistakenly because the reality of the experience on which the mistaken action was based no longer exists for awareness. Understanding how the gameboard is laid out doesn‘t stop the itch, doesn‘t end desire, but it does allow awareness to scratch the itch in a way that‘s truly enjoyable, in a way that isn‘t experientially self-divisive. All experience is like a rainbow that extends from and depends on a relationship which existence has formed with itself, and what we are most directly is that existence. Existence doesn‘t need experience to exist because experience is an extension of existence. So, what we are must ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 543 ultimately exist outside the context of and beyond any experience, including the experience of ourself as ―I.‖ Understanding that all experience is like a rainbow, including awareness‘ experience of itself as ―I,‖ we cease to become attached to this idea of ourself as ―I,‖ and then we‘re no longer moved to defend this ―I,‖ any more than we‘re moved to seek the end of the rainbow. If we think that the rainbow is an independently existent structure, we‘ll seek its end; and if we think that ―I‖ is what we are, we‘ll become attached to this narrow self-definition and defend it. The quest for the end of the rainbow ceases once the relational nature of the rainbow is comprehended, and the attachment to and defense of ―I‖ cease once the rainbow-like nature of ―I‖ is comprehended. Once we‘re able to see through the illusion of independent-object existence, what we‘re left with is what we really are. Seeing through the illusion of independent-object existence doesn‘t mean that all experience ceases, just that awareness no longer mistakes its object-experiences for separate, independently existent realities, and so no longer becomes attached to them, no longer engages in a futile and experientially self-divisive quest for the end of the rainbow. Attachment to the idea of winning and fear of the idea of losing make us unable to fully enjoy the game we‘re playing, which is nothing other than existence in the natural and spontaneous process of enjoying itself. Understanding our existence as a game doesn‘t end the or alter its eventual outcome, but it does make playing the game more enjoyable, which is what got us here in the first place. By understanding the nature of the cosmic game, the playing field, and the rules of play, we become more able to play our life as a game, enjoying the rest of existence as our friend, rather than becoming so focused on winning that we lose sight of what the cosmic game really is all about, and thereby cause the rest of existence to experientially function as, and so become, our enemy. However, becoming attached to the experience of ourself as ―I‖ and seeking the end of the rainbow are themselves just aspects of the cosmic game of hide-and-seek. We search for something in the distance, failing to realize that what we see ―out there‖ can never be what‘s actually there, because what we see ―out there‖ exists as such only in relation to where we are ―in here.‖ We go off looking for something over there, only to eventually find that it‘s been right here all along. So, have fun, enjoy yourself as you search for what‘s actually yourself, inevitably coming back to what you are, always have been, and always will be. A final note Descriptions, by their nature, are limited with regard to what they can tell us about the nature of reality, because descriptions require experience and experience works by defining existence. Since the ultimate nature of reality is beyond experience, forming the basis of experience, no model or theory of reality can ever be perfect or complete or without limitations, inasmuch as all models or theories are derived from some level of experience and therefore are in some way attempts to define what exists in the absence of definition. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 3 | pp. 415-544 Kaufman, S. E. Integration of Experience, Awareness, & Consciousness into the Relational-Matrix Model II: Consciousness and the Awareness of Experience 544 The nature of knowing as an experience is such that the whole from which knowledge extends and on which knowledge depends can never be known completely as it is, as a whole. Existence is unified, reality is ultimately nonseparate, and yet the process by which experience is formed by nature precludes an experience of that wholeness. In describing existence, we‘re defining existence. In defining existence, we must create apparent divisions within what is indivisible, apparent separations of what is inseparable. Therefore, in order to describe existence, we must in some way distort it, make it appear as it‘s not. If existence "as it is" is the ocean, then experience is the sand. Both a beach and a desert are made of sand, and one is certainly closer to the ocean than the other, but neither is the ocean— neither is what exists directly. We can, by using experiential descriptions and definitions, move ever closer to the ocean of existence, but we shouldn‘t make the mistake of thinking that those experiential descriptions and definitions can ever by themselves take us into the ocean of existence itself. Experientially describing and defining the nature of reality is useful and liberating only as long as we remain aware of the context within which such descriptions and definitions must occur, only as long as we don‘t mistake them for existence itself. Accurate descriptions and definitions of reality can be used as a tool—let‘s say, as a rope to help lift awareness out of the pit of experiential delusion that awareness can dig for itself. However, like all tools, this rope is useful only to the extent that it‘s used as intended or as designed. As it so often says on the box: ―The use of this device for purposes other than those for which it was intended may cause injury.‖ If the rope is mistaken for the reality it‘s being used to tie down or get to, then the user will eventually become snarled in that very rope, which then will function as just another hindrance to progress. Thinking that the ultimate nature of reality can ever be described and defined is just replacing one set of chains with another. The new set of chains may be relatively shinier and less cumbersome than the old set, but they‘re still chains nonetheless. Thus, although existence has been modeled in this work as a relational matrix, existence itself isn‘t that. The relational-matrix model is only an approximation to knowledge of a level of reality that by nature defies complete knowing. Although we can use a map to increase our knowledge of where we are, the map itself isn‘t where we are. Where we are is just where we are, what-is is just what is, and neither is amenable to being completely known. Experience as a relative reality has its limits, whereas existence, being ultimately nonrelational or extrarelational, has none. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

213 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 213-215 Nixon, G. M. Preface/Introduction Article Preface/Introduction Gregory M. Nixon* The question under discussion is metaphysical and truly elemental. It emerges in two aspects – how did we come to be conscious of our own existence, and, as a deeper corollary, do existence and awareness necessitate each other? I am bold enough to explore these questions and I invite you to come along; I make no claim to have discovered absolute answers. However, I do believe I have created here a compelling interpretation. You’ll have to judge for yourself. What follows is the presentation of three essays I have worked on over the past several years seeing publication for the first time. “Hollows of Experience” was written first as an invited chapter for a collection on the ontology of consciousness. However, when cuts became necessary, my chapter got the knife. Its length has prohibited it from publication in any print journal. “Myth and Mind” was written next as a journal article, but as my involvement with it grew so did its length, so it has also idled on my websty awaiting its call. “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience” was written most recently, but it is the only one to have been available to the public elsewhere than my own website. Under the name, “The Continuum of Experience”, it was Target Article #95 on the recently closed Karl Jaspers Forum (for discussion purposes only). I have put them in a different sequence here, for reasons of logical sense. Up first, “Panexperientialism” deals with an idea difficult for many to accept, namely that conscious experience is a particular mode of symbolically reflected experience that is largely unique to our species. However, I aver that experienced sensation in itself (as found, for example, in autonomic sensory response systems) goes “all the way down” into nature, and thus the title, panexperientialism. Understanding this idea is helpful to dealing with the focus on language in Part I of “Hollows”, next, since here speech and general symbolic interaction in general are found to be the catalysts for the creation of our consciously experienced world (our “lived reality”). In Part II, however, I explore how experienced sensations must be coeval with existence, and, with even greater temerity, how all this sensational existence might have arisen within some literally inconceivable background of awareness-in-itself that yet has a dynamism that occasionally breaks into existence as experiential events and entities. (The latter may sound wacky, but physicists and cosmologists are themselves attempting to come to terms with that which seethes with vast potential energy in what they refer to as the quantum vacuum.) “Myth and Mind” was put third since it deals with a major lacuna in “Hollows” – that presumed prehistoric period when members of our species made the painful crossing of Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 214 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 213-215 Nixon, G. M. Preface/Introduction the symbolic threshold into the beginnings of cultural consciousness. Speech plays a central role here, too, but I look more at narrative structures from the dawn of selfawareness when ritual and myth became vital to human survival. Why would fantastic stories and bizarre rituals be necessary? I speculate that growing foresight led to the unavoidable realization of certain mortality, from which, in turn, emerged the secondary realization that we were now alive. In contrast to our yet-to-come death, we have life here and now, and by ritually identifying with a symbolically expanded mythic, i.e., sacred, reality, we may continue to live on after bodily death, just as our ancestors and loved ones must also do. Language and mythmaking are necessary to avoid mortal despair and they remain at the core of human consciousness. As Ernst Cassirer (1944) has noted, language and myth are “twin creatures”, both metaphoric webs over a reality we can never wholly comprehend. We live in the symbolic and construct our works of imagination and wars of conquest to make life meaningful, to feel immortal, and to sense that we ourselves participate in a reality greater than ourselves. No doubt we do, but this does not mean our culturally constructed self-identities survive the death of our bodies, and it does not imply that our symbolic concepts can ever indicate the ultimate truth. We simply must symbolize an extended reality that was sacred to our ancestors: “Is it not our way, as illusory as it may be, to force continuance on our world and our life in the face of their inevitable ending? Are we not compelled to extend those imaginary horizons as far as we can despite the terror and the sometime joy their extension incites? Is their closure not a form of death?” (Crapanzano, p. 210) Of course, this leaves me in the uncomfortable position of being forced to admit that this venture of mine must inevitably be another attempt at meaningful mythmaking. But what else could it be? This is certainly not a scientific proof though it is indeed an academically rigorous exploration. (Just try to count the citations!) I hope the reader will judge my thesis on the basis of its coherence, the sense of meaning it evokes, my intellectual responsibility, and, finally, the engagement it inspires. If you have read my expositions and found yourself immersed in the timeless questions I here call forth, I would call these writings successful (even if you violently disagree with my answers). I am very grateful to Huping Hu for granting me this special issue of JCER in which to present my ideas in some detail. He has patiently dealt with my exuberant approach and allowed the many changes I kept coming up with right until the final publication date. I also wish to thank the many potential commentators who politely replied to my invitation, and, even more, I thank those who made time to write actual commentaries References Cassirer, E. (1944). An Essay on Man: An Introduction to a Philosophy of Human Culture. New Haven/London: Yale UP. Crapanzano, V. (2004). Imaginative Horizons: An Essay in Literary-Philosophical Anthropology. Chicago: U of Chicago Press. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 215 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 213-215 Nixon, G. M. Preface/Introduction Gregory M. Nixon University of Northern British Columbia Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx Contents Preface/Introduction 213 From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience: The Continuum of Experience 216 Hollows of Experience 234 Myth and Mind: The Origin of Human Consciousness in the Discovery of the Sacred 289 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

831 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part I) Article A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra Elio Conte (1,2)*, Orlando Todarello (3), Vincenza Laterza (4), Andrei Yuri Khrennikov (6,) Leonardo Mendolicchio (5) & Antonio Federici (1), (1) Department of Neurological and Psychiatric Sciences & Department of Pharmacology and Human Physiology Tires, Center for Innovative Technologies for Signal Detection and Processing, University of Bari, Italy (2) School of Advanced International Studies on Theoretical and Nonlinear Methodologies of Physics -Bari, Italy (3) Department of Neurological and Psychiatric Sciences, University of Bari, Italy (4) Post graduate School in Clinical Psychology – University of Bari –Italy (5) Department of Mental Health,University of Foggia, Italy (6) International Center for Mathematical Modeling in Physics and Cognitive Sciences, University of Vaxjo S{35195), Sweden ABSTRACT We comment some recent results obtained by using a Clifford bare bone skeleton of quantum mechanics in order to formulate the conclusion that quantum mechanics has its origin in the logic, and relates conceptual entities. Such results touch directly the basic problem about the structure of our cognitive and conceptual dynamics and thus of our mind. The problem of exploring consciousness results consequently to be strongly linked. This is the reason because studies on quantum mechanics applied to this matter are so important for neurologists and psychologists. Under this profile we present some experimental results showing violation of Bell inequality during the MBTI test in investigation of C.V. Jung’s theory of personality. Key Words: experimental verification, violation of Bell’s Inequality, quantum model, Jung theory, personality, Clifford algebra. 1. Introduction Some recent results deserve here some further comment and consideration. 1) By using the Clifford algebra one of us (1,2) has recently obtained two results that seem to be of importance. According to a procedure previously introduced from Y. Ilamed and N. Salingaros [1], he started giving proof of two existing Clifford algebras, the Si that has isomorphism with that one of Pauli matrices and the N i,±1 where N i stands for the dihedral Clifford algebra. The salient feature is *Corresponding author: Elio Conte E-mail: elio.conte@fastwebnet.it ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 832 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra that he showed that the N i,±1 may be obtained from the Si algebra when we attribute a numerical value (+1 or −1) to one of the basic elements (e 1,e 2,e 3) of the Si. He utilized such shown result to advance a criterium under which the Si algebra has as counterpart the description of quantum systems that in standard quantum mechanics are considered in absence of observation and quantum measurement while the N i,±1 attend when a quantum measurement is performed on such system with advent of wave function collapse. The physical content of the criterium is that the quantum measurement with wave function collapse induces the passage in the considered quantum system from the Si to N i,+1 or to the N i,−1 algebras, where each algebra has of course its proper rules of commutation. He re-examined the von Neumann postulate on quantum measurement, and gave a proper justification of such postulate by using the Si algebra. Soon after he studied some applications of the above mentioned criterium to some cases of interest in standard quantum mechanics, analyzing in particular a two state quantum system, the case of time dependent interaction of such system with a measuring apparatus and finally the case of a quantum system plus measuring apparatus developed at the order n=4 of the considered Clifford algebras and of the corresponding density matrix in standard quantum mechanics. In each of such cases examined, he found that the passage from the algebra Si to N i,±1, considered during the quantum measurement of the system, actually describes the collapse of the wave function. Therefore he concluded that the actual quantum measurement has as counterpart in the Clifford algebraic description, the passage from the Si to the N i,±1 Clifford algebras, reaching in this manner the objective to reformulate von Neumann postulate on quantum measurement and proposing a self-consistent formulation of quantum theory. In substance, on the basis of such results , we may say that it was reached mathematical proof of two existing stages of our reality, an ontic state of irreducible indeterminism, often called in standard quantum mechanics as the state of potentiality of a given quantum system, and a stage marked instead from actualization that is to say ….the reduction of the basic potentiality to a level of made aware actualization of some explored property or quantum variable of such investigated quantum system. The first stage is described by the proper Clifford algebra Si as well as the second is described instead by the different Clifford algebra N i,±1. Let us express in detail that such obtained results change very little the conceptual framework of standard quantum mechanics. It is known from more than eighty years ago that quantum mechanics, according in particular to Von Neumann in 1955, predicates that we have two fundamentally different types of evolution for a quantum system. First there is the casual (reversible) Schrödinger equation, and the second, there is the non casual (irreversible) change due to a measurement. We also know very well that such standard interpretation has given origin in such years to a tight debate that of course was not able to lead to a final conclusion on such matter. The basic reason is that von Neumann did not show that reality actually follows such steps. He only postulated the two previously mentioned indications of Schrödinger causal (reversible) time evolution and of the non causal (irreversible) change due to a measurement, respectively. The novel feature is that we give now mathematical proof of two such existing Clifford algebras linked respectively, the Si to the first kind of quantum time evolution and the N i,±1 to the non casual (irreversible ) change due to a measurement. In substance, we give finally proof of what in von Neumann was only a postulate and such result, according to the demonstrative privilege that mathematics has always had in science and in particular in physics, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 833 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra should represent an actual advance in the knowledge that we have on this matter. The results my be found in detail in [1] As any mathematical or physical new approach, also the present results are open to interpretations. We enunciate the following statement: The first algebra, the S i , refers to the representation of a particular situation in quantum mechanics where the observer has not been called to measure and to decide, as example on the state of a given two-state system. So, it relates the standard quantum mechanics. Through an operation that mathematically is represented by the N i algebra, the observer finally decides to perform a quantum measurement and to specify which state is the one that will be or is being observed. In conclusion, when it happens that the so called wave function reduction or collapse of wave function we have a transition from the S i algebra to the N i algebra. Note that we have been forced to use the following phrases “the observer has not been called to measure and to decide” and “Through an operation that mathematically is represented by the N i algebra, the observer finally decides”. The term “decision” is recurrent in both such phrases. The first point is that we know now the algebra relating the system when the subject does not decide to perform a measurement and we know that there exists another algebra that relates the subject when he decides to perform the measurement. Let us explain in more detail. The used term Decision is the key word here. Quantum measurement is an operation that mathematically is represented by the N i algebra. The profound discrimination between such two algebras indicates that a quantum measurement is not only a physical interaction between two systems( the measuring apparatus and the measured system) but, in accord in some manner with Schneider [2], we cannot avoid to add a basic other feature . A quantum measurement is fundamentally an interaction between languages, perception, and cognition. In other terms, we cannot escape to fix one time for all that a quantum measurement is a semantic at, just using here Schneider words. We state precisely: Discrimination between S i and N i algebra indicates that a measurement is a cognitive act. It does not exist a measurement without a cognitive task. It is not important if we read directly the result of the measurement on the instrument or if instead it is read automatically , it is not important if the measuring apparatus is macroscopic or not, it is fundamentally important to accept that any measurement is conceived at its source on the basis of a cognitive –semantic act. Any measuring instrument is realized at its source so to perform a semantic-cognitive act and without such basic condition we have not a measurement. A measuring device is a structure whose counterpart t is the matter of our perception and of our mental operations. We cannot ignore that such operation of measurement cannot run if we have not previously established the mathematical symbols , the semantic and semiotic functions, in brief … the cognitive performance, that enables us ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 834 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra subsequently to express the results of the measurement. The arising conclusion is that the shown mathematical results given in [1] evidence that quantum mechanics is a two-faced Janus … from one face looking to basic phenomenology of matter and by the second face looking at our conceptual entities , to our mind , and thus to our consciousness. 2) In the previous point, we have arrived to conclude that quantum theory includes in itself not only the description of the reality at the microphysical level. It also envelops the cognitive performance that is required to conceive reality. This is the reason because studies on quantum mechanics are so important for neuroscience and psychology. To support this thesis, we have the previous mentioned theorems but we have also a further proof that one of us (1,2) has recently obtained.[3] . Let us start considering the following argument. In 1932 von Neumann showed a result that is of crucial importance for us. In brief, this author constructed a quantum matrix logic on the basis of quantum mechanics. Also even if highly promising, this result, however, cannot be considered so central and determinant for our purposes. Actually, in order to obtain a novel feature, we have to show that the result that was obtained from von Neumann may be inverted. In fact, in the previous mentioned papers [3], one of us (1,2) was able to show that not only a quantum matrix logic may be constructed on the basis of quantum mechanics but exactly the inverted situation. He showed that quantum mechanics may be derived on the basis of logic. Arriving to give proof that quantum mechanics derives from logic, one completes the circle of our reasoning. He reaches the highest possible support to the thesis that quantum theory is the first “physical theory” of cognition of our mind and that we think in a quantum probabilistic manner. This is the objective that was reached in [3]. Stated that quantum mechanics runs about two basic foundations, the first being the irreducible indeterminism and the second being the quantum interference, starting with his usual basic Clifford elaboration, this author constructed a Clifford logic approach. Than, following the scheme introduced in the previous point (1), and thus using the two theorems relating respectively the S i and the N i algebras, the author demonstrated that, according to such Clifford algebraic scheme, the origins of the most fundamental quantum phenomena as the indeterminism and the quantum interference, derive not from the traditional physics itself but from the logic. As statement, the only admissible consequent conclusion is that quantum mechanics relates cognitive-conceptual entities and that we think in a quantum probabilistic manner. Of course we have to outline here with greatest emphasis that the excellent logic Yuri Orlov, starting with 1977 and when he was in prison Camp 37-2 in Urals in USSR as dissident, started to study this problem [4]. He introduced a so called Wave Calculus based upon Wave logic. He ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 835 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra did not use the Clifford algebra but arrived to similar conclusions on the logical origins of quantum mechanics. There is still some other comment to add. If we have logical origins of quantum mechanics as consequence we have a logical relativism in this theory. How is that we have not such logical relativism in classical physics? What is the reason because we have instead such strong constraint in quantum mechanics? We give here an answer that of course is in accord with Orlov. The explanation is as it follows: There are stages of our reality in which it results impossible to unconditionally defining the truth. Logic, language and thus cognition enter with a so fundamental role in quantum mechanics because there are levels of our reality in which the fundamental features of cognition and thus of logic and language, and thus the conceptual entities, acquire the same importance as the features of what is being described. At this level of reality we no more may separate the features of matter per se from the features of the cognition, of the logic and of the language that we use to describe it. Conceptual entities non more are separated from the object of cognitive performance. As correctly Yuri Orlov outlined in his several papers, the truths of logical statements about dynamic variables relating matter structure become dynamic variables themselves in quantum mechanics. Therefore our statement is that the cognition becomes in itself an immanent feature that operates symbiotically with the matter phenomenology that traditional physics aims to represent. This is the profound reason because we have to apply quantum mechanics at cognitive level. Quantum mechanics is the first “physical theory” of cognition. It enables us to approach the first and fundamental principle that interfaces mind and matter. There are levels of reality in which, as described by quantum mechanics, we no more may separate the features of matter per se from the features of the cognition, of the logic and of the language that we use to describe it. This is the basic reason because we think in a quantum probabilistic manner and this is the reason because quantum mechanics is so important in neuroscience and psychology. In conclusion, by the previous discussion, we have reached the results that we have exposed in the points (1) and (2). It is rather evident that they touch the basic problem about the structure of our cognitive and conceptual entities and thus on our mind. The problem of exploring our consciousness seems to us to be consequently strongly linked. It is our personal view that such studies need to be strongly encouraged and this is the reason because in the present paper we relate about some further and recently results that we have obtained about the possibility of quantum mechanics to adequately represent mental states. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 836 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra 2. A Rough Scheme of Quantum Mechanics with Clifford Algebra Let us give a brief statement of our Clifford algebraic approach to quantum mechanics. We use Clifford algebra to represent a bare bone skeleton of quantum mechanics. Let us give an example of our approach. Let us introduce three basic algebraic abstract elements ei , i  1,2,3 , having the following basic features: 1) ei2  1 and 2) ei e j  e j ei  iek with i , j ,k  1,2,3 , ijk  permutation of 1, 2, 3 and i 2  1 (2.1) We see that the axioms 1) and 2) introduce the two basic requirements that we invoke for quantum mechanics: ontic potentiality/irreducible indeterminism and non commutativity. The first axiom in fact considers an abstract entity, ei , but at the same time fixes that its square is 1. This is to say that to each ei with i  1,2,3 , under particular conditions in such an algebra, may correspond or the value +1 or the value -1. For each ei we have the ontological potentiality to link one of such possible numerical values. The second axiom introduces non commutativity for ei ( i  1,2,3 ). The abstract elements ei are marked by irreducible, intrinsic indetermination. Consequently, we may calculate their mean values,  ei  , considering the probabilities for +1 or for -1 values, and writing  e1  ( 1 ) p( 1 )  ( 1 ) p( 1 ) , e 2  ( 1 ) p( 1 )  ( 1 ) p( 1 ) ,  e3  ( 1 ) p( 1 )  ( 1 ) p( 1 ) (2.2) and p( 1 ) represent the probabilities for +1 and -1 values, respectively, with p( 1 )  p( 1 )  1 . The quantum like features of this algebra may be synthesized in the following equation that we discussed in our previous work where of course a detailed explanation of our Clifford elaboration may be found [1]: where p( 1 )  e1  2   e2  2   e3  2  1 (2.3) In this manner a quantum mechanical scheme may be represented by such algebra. We may introduce the well known Pauli matrices at order n=2 as representative for the basic elements ei . This is an important operation since, from one hand, it helps us to identify some hidden features of our algebra, and, on the other hand, it introduces for the first time the possibility of a selfreferential operation. Let us proceed with the aid of an example. Let us suppose that in the operation of a progressive description of some entity or structure, we have arrived at the condition that two dichotomous variables A and B are actually required in order to characterize it. We may use the matrix representation of the basic elements ei and we may realize some new algebraic elements given by the direct product of matrices. In this case, we will have new basic ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 837 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra elements in the following manner: Eoi  I  ei and Eio  ei  I being I the unit matrix, i  1,2,3. (2.4) Note that E0i and Ei 0 will satisfy the same rules that were given in 1) and 2) for ei . In detail we will have that E02i  1 , E0i E0 j  iE0k , and Ei20  1 , and Eio E jo  iEk 0 . It is important to observe that we will have also that i  1,2,3; j  1,2,3 . (2.5) E0i E j 0  E j 0 Ei 0 for any ( i , j ) and As required, we have now two dichotomous variables, E0i and Ei 0 , i  1,2,3, to describe the given process. Let us consider still that ei are the basic elements of our algebra given at order n=2 while E0i and Ei 0 are the same basic elements but at order n=4. 2a. The arrangement of an experimental situation Let us start by considering the following experimental situation. We have an abstract or material entity that we call S that is constituted by a pair of separated sub entities S1 and S 2 on which we may perform four experiments that we call respectively a1 , a2 , a3 , and a4 .Let us still consider that each of the experiments ai ( i  1,2,3,4 ) has two possible outcomes, or 1 ( r ) or 1 ( r ) . Still, continue to admit that some of these experiments may be performed together, respectively on S1 and S 2 , and we will call them coincidence experiments aij ( i , j  1,2,3,4 ) . The experiment aij has four possible results that are: ai ( r )a j ( r ) , ai ( r )a j ( r ), ai ( r )a j ( r ), ai ( r )a j ( r ) (2.6) We may also introduce the expectation values for such coincidence experiments. We call them Eij , and according to the definition, we have that Eij  ( 1 ) p( ai ( r )a j ( r ) ) +(-1) p( ai ( r )a j ( r ))  ( 1 ) p( ai ( r )a j ( r )  ( 1 ) p( ai ( r )a j ( r )) (2.7) Obviously, pij means the probability that the coincidence experiment ai j gives the outcomes ri r j while, generally speaking, pi will represent the probability that the single experiment ai will give outcome ri ( i , j  , ) This is a basic scheme that in several our previous papers we have discussed in the framework of the so called Clifford algebra by which we have realized a rough or “bare bone skeleton “of quantum mechanics [1]]. We will not discuss further such elaboration here addressing the reader to the above quoted papers for a close examination. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 838 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra In the forthcoming steps of this paper we will describe the physical conditions in which by using the (2.6) and the (2.7), we may derive the celebrated Bell inequality which states explicitly E13  E14  E23  E24  2 (2.8) Summarizing, we have an entity S constituted by two separated components entities S1 and S 2 .We may perform an experiment a1 on S1 obtaining as result r or r . We may still perform an experiment a2 on S1 still obtaining as result or r or r . We may perform an experiment a3 on S 2 and it may be also similar to a1 on S1 with possible results r or r , and finally an experiment a 4 on S 2 that may be similar to a 2 on S1 with possible results r or r . Now, the experiment a1 may be performed in coincidence with the experiments a3 and a4 , and thus we denote such coincidence experiments by a13 and a14 respectively, and thus obtaining E13 and E14 . We may also perform the coincidence experiments a23 and a24 obtaining E23 and E24 . All such expectation values are considered in the previous (2.8). In quantum mechanics, we choose the set of observable properties of a quantum entity to which we are interested. These constitute the state of the entity. We also define a state space, which delineates the possible states of the entity. A quantum entity is described using not just a state space but also a set of measurement contexts. The algebraic structure of the state space is given by the vector space structure of the complex Hilbert space: states are represented by unit vectors, and measurement contexts by self-adjoint operators. The crucial notion on which we may fix our consideration is the notion of quantum entanglement. With reference to entity S and to the two composing subentities S1 and S 2 one says that a quantum entity is entangled if it is a composite of subentities that no more can be factorized in their components that of course can be identified only by a separating measurement. When a measurement is performed on the entangled entity, its state changes probabilistically and this change of state is called quantum collapse. In pure quantum mechanics, if H1 is the Hilbert space representing the state space of the first subentity, and H 2 the Hilbert space representing the state space of the second subentity, the entangled state will be represented by H1  H 2 The tensor product determines new states with new properties. In brief we have a profound difference: in quantum mechanics we may consider the space of the composite system not the Cartesian product, as in classical physics, but the tensor product, and it introduces the existence of new states with new properties. Entanglement was recognized early as one of the key features of quantum mechanics. Entanglement can be described as the correlation between distinct subsystems and such correlation cannot be created by local actions on each subsystem separately. The advantage given by quantum entanglement relies on the crucial premise that it cannot be reproduced by any classical theory [5]. Despite the fact that the possibility of quantum entanglement was acknowledged almost as soon as quantum theory was discovered, it is only in recent years that consideration has been given to finding methods to quantify it. Historically the Bell inequalities ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 839 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra are seen as a means of determining whether a two quantum state system is entangled. It is now known that the larger the violation of the Bell inequality is , the more the entanglement is present in the system This leads to the perception that the Bell inequalities represent a measure of entanglement in such systems. In this manner we arrive to the conclusion that we can use the violation of Bell inequality as an experimental indication for the presence of a quantum structure. If Bell inequalities are satisfied for a set of probabilities connected to outcomes of the previously considered experiments, there exists a classical Kolmogorovian probability model. In such model the probability can be explained as due to a lack of knowledge about the precise state of the system under consideration. If, on the other hand, Bell inequalities are violated, as shown in [6], no such classical Kolmogorovian probability model exists. Quantum states arise as having ontological potentiality and thus intrinsic irreducible indeterminism. Probabilities in this case are involved as non classical and thus become the non classical probabilities, that is to say, the quantum probabilities that characterize the sphere of quantum ontological processes. This the reason because it is so important to examine the (2.8) . 3. The problem of the Self We have to consider now the problem of the Self. May we introduce a mathematical-physical model of the Self? Also if it is well known that the first psychological studies and physics went both in psychology at the first starting of this discipline, to day they are seen together so infrequently. May be that when physics is considered so linked to mathematics as it is the case of the present elaboration, both fields seem so abstract that describing one in terms of the other is seen soon from psychologists or neurologists with some prejudice and considered not able of giving some direct advantage Freud developed his results using symbols, analogies, figures in the world of the arts and of the literature but never he used mathematics or physics. Instead, there are eminent figures of mathematicians that have given fundamental contributions having had so much to say about the workings of mind [7], and Descartes gave the first psychological legacy to physical knowledge by his Cogito ergo Sum... In this paper we would be able to indicate some result in the direction of mapping the structure of the self by using quantum mechanics: to present some modeling example aiming to match the human experience of selfhood. In modeling the Self we outline here his first nature that is reflectivity. Self is by its nature selfreferential. .It is at once subject and object, observer and observed of itself as well as of the others. This attitude has often lead psychologists to consider dualistic theories. Self-observation is the key concept here. Lefebvre's mathematical approach to social psychology is often referred to as reflexive theory – It is related to the possibility of taking into account subjects' selfimage(s). We aim to outline here that the centuries-old philosophical and psychological ideas ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 840 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra that man has an image of the self containing an image of the self obtains a new advance in the mathematical-physical model of the subject possessing reflection that we outline here. One assumption underlying the model is that the subject tends to generate patterns of behavior such that some kind of similarity is established between the subject himself and his second order image of the self. Still, quantum mechanics is based on its basic formulation of intrinsic and irreducible indeterminism. Would psychologists speak about indetermination or inter-determination? Many disorders of the Self are considered to be based on the divarication between the subjective and objective features of the self. Often psychologists indicate that in hallucinations, as example, dreams, imaginations, the subjective and objective features separate. In the intrinsic undependability of selfobservation, a dose of intrinsic and irreducible indetermination arises for us all and we have unconscious as relevant counterpart. At the extreme limits we have the whole spectrum of psychopathology. So, the importance of a model arises. In the case of the Self, we are accustomed to conceive the simplest features of observer and observed that in our interpretation become the inside and outside, respectively. The fact that they are separate and at the same time have unity appears impossible to us but actually it is due to an artifact of our traditional point of view on this matter. This is precisely the question with all dualism in psychology. However this is a matter that may be overcome accepting a less ingenuous and less modest vision of our reality. Think as example about the concept of quantum entanglement in quantum mechanics or consider E0i E j 0  E j 0 Ei0 of our algebraic basic scheme. They give rise to the new algebraic basic set E ji or Eij . Using our Clifford algebraic formalism, for the first time we have also introduced a self referential mathematical formalism. To explain such a referential mathematical operation, let us return to our basic algebraic scheme but evidencing what V.A. Lefebvre [8] recently outlined. Following Lefebvre, as we know, the central topic of Western philosophy, starting with John Locke, was the problem of representing mentally one’s own thoughts and feelings. Actually, it is a very difficult concept to represent. This is the reason to use here a pictorial representation, the same figure that V.A. Lefebvre introduced to describe his formulation [8]. Tentatively we may express self attitude through the reflection. A subject having reflection may be conceived as a miniature human figure with the image of the self inside his head. We recover it here in the following figure (Fig. 1) with Clifford algebraic formulation. It represents with care the subject with reflection. We prefer to call it the Clifford algebraic picture of a subject having perception of itself. In this figure, following V.A. Lefebvre, we may say that inside the subject’s inner domain, there is an image of the self with its own inner domain. An image of the self is traditionally regarded as the result of the subject’s conscious constructive activity. Let us analyze how the Clifford mathematical operation given in (2.4) realizes this formulation. It is the faithful correspondent of the self-picture given in figure in which, in fact, E0i , for example, or also Ei 0 , contain in their inside that image of itself that is ei . We may conclude that, at least for our present possibilities of understanding what the self is and its self-perception represents, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 841 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra we have for the first time identified a basic algebraic scheme and the corresponding mathematical operations to represent it. ei E0i or Ei0 Fig.1 Self Let us shift for an instant from our view point of bare bone skeleton of quantum mechanics, all based on the use of abstract algebraic entities of Clifford algebra to the standard quantum mechanics. Here we have the spin this time conceived instead as quantum physical observable. We have to evidence here that previously other authors outlined the role of spin as self-referential variable [9] and its possible role on consciousness. They introduced the spin-mediated consciousness theory. We consider the basic ei elements in our Clifford algebraic formulation as abstract entities, and this concept of abstraction is of fundamental importance for the whole body of our elaboration also if in standard quantum mechanics they are usually connected to spin. In points (1) and (2) we outlined that quantum mechanics relates conceptual entities, and we have several times evidenced that the final approach of our elaboration is that there are stages of our reality in which we no more may separate the “object” from the cognitive feature that we have about it. Consequently, matter is interfaced with cognitive feature. This could be one of the profound reasons because in their papers in [9] it was evidenced the so important role for the spin also arriving to give explanation of its role at the neurophysiological level. 4. A Quantum Model of Jung Theory Realized with Clifford Algebra 4a A Brief Review of Jung and His Theory. Now we will state first a brief, hurried and for this also approximate exposition of Jung theory just to take into accounts some of the basic concepts that we will use in detail in the next section. Carl Gustav Jung was born in the small Swiss village of Kessewil in date July 26, 1875,. His ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 842 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra father was Paul Jung, a country parson, and his mother was Emilie Preiswerk. Very soon he discovered philosophy, and this led him to forsake the strong family tradition and to study medicine becoming a psychiatrist. In December 1900 he began working at the Psychiatric Institute in Zurich, the Burghölzli, directed by Eugen Bleuler. In the winter of 1902-1903 Jung was in Paris to attend the lectures of Pierre Janet. In 1903 he married Emma Rauschenbach (1882-1955), who remained with him until his death. In 1905 he became a lecturer at the University of Zurich, where he remained until 1913. Between 1904 and 1907 he published several studies on verbal tests of association and in 1907 the book Psychology of dementia praecox. The scientific activity of Jung is manifested by the concept of "complex". For Jung, complexes make up the basic structure of the psyche. They are central themes or content areas that are powerful, emotionally charged, and connected to archetypes. Complexes organize and influence our feelings, thoughts, perceptions, and behavior. The self in Jungian theory is one of the archetypes. It signifies the coherent whole, unified consciousness and unconscious of a person 'the totality of the psyche. The Self, according to Jung, is realised as the product of individuation, which in Jungian view is the process of integrating one's personality. For Jung, the self is symbolised by the circle (especially when divided in four quadrants), the square, or the mandala. What distinguishes Jungian psychology is the idea that there are two centers of the personality. The ego is the center of consciousness, whereas the Self is the center of the total personality, which includes consciousness, the unconscious, and the ego. The Self is both the whole and the center. While the ego is a self-contained little circle off the center contained within the whole, the Self can be understood as the greater circle. Generally speaking in Jung theory we have a dynamics with very interrelated relationships. When relationships weakens or break, the other complexes become autonomous, and arrogate to themselves the possibility of direct action, by a process of dissociation which is the source of psychological problems. Jung’s study of the Ego also led to his laying the foundation for the study of psychological types Jung was fascinated with the concept of classifying people according to their particular personality traits and preferences. As we will consider in detail in the following section, based on his observations, exposed in Psychological Types, he identified two psychological attitudes – Introversion, in which psychological energy is directed inward and Extraversion, in which it is directed outward - and four psychological Ego-functions - Intuition, Sensing, Thinking and Feeling. He explained that each of us exhibits both attitudes and all four functions at times, but that we each prefer one of the attitudes and one function from each of the Intuition/Sensing and Thinking/Feeling alternatives. As we become more whole and integrate more unconscious material into our personality, however, we may, at key developmental points in the lifespan, become more adept at using our inferior functions. This work later formed the basis for the development of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, currently the most popular personality typing system in the world, and that we will use in the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 843 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra present paper. Initially close to the ideas of Sigmund Freud, he finally withdrew in 1913 after a process of conceptual differentiation culminated with the publication in 1912 of Libido: symbols and transformations. In it he expounded his guidance, analytical research by broadening the individual's personal history to the history of human society. The unconscious is not just the individual, produced by the removal, but in the individual there is also a collective unconscious that is expressed in archetypes. 4b A Quantum Model in Jung Theory Now we may pass to consider a possible theory of personality. In Jungian theory, the Self is one of the archetypes. The coherent whole unifies consciousness and unconscious of a person. As previously said, the Self, according to Jung, is realised as the product of individuation, which in Jungian view is the process of integrating one's personality. Let us consider now in detail some basic features of Jung theory. As previously mentioned, we have four basic psychological functions, Thinking, Feeling, Sensing, Intuiting and two Attitudes (Introversion and Extraversion). Certainly, if we claim here that such psychological function are linked and inter-related with attitudes in humans, we do a so general and unspecific statement that all the psychologists will agree. However, an interesting indication could be to advance such so phenomenological approach, attempting to give to the basic four psychological functions, to the attitudes and to their possible interrelationship, a theoretical formulation so that we may experiment about, and obtain precise and quantitative results. The question that we pose in detail here is the following: could psychological functions be quantum entangled with attitudes? If such kind of possible correlations should be evidenced, we certainly will obtain first of all a further evidence of the effective role explained from quantum mechanics in brain and mind processes, and, in addition, a new quantum model of Jung theory of personality should arise, this time based on the principles of a well defined physical theory. It should represent an actual advance. We have to introduce here a necessary and precise statement.. The first idea to use two qubits for Jung’s theory of personality is due to Reinhard Blutner, and Elena Hochnadel. They started their work based on this excellent idea in 2009 [10] In this paper we proceed now giving a Clifford algebraic elaboration of the same matter, thus confirming it and advancing with the experimental results that we have obtained. Let us indicate the Feeling by F, the thinking by T, the sensing by S and the Intuition by I. Still we call E the extroversion and I1 the introversion. Our approach should be well known to the reader by this time. We introduce now some Clifford basic elements. We call the Thinking function (T) by E03 . It is a dichotomous variable that as previously explained may admit values or +1 or –1. E03  1 means that the subject is Thinking. E03  1 means that he is Feeling.(F). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 844 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra So we have that T   F  E03 (4.1) This is the quantum Clifford algebraic scheme for rational functions. Now we introduce the irrational functions. We call the Sensing (S) by the Clifford basic element while E01 to which again are linked the values 1 . E01  1 means that the subject is Sensing instead E01  1 means that he is Intuitive (I). So we have S   I  E01 . (4.2) These are the four psychological functions characterized by our quantum algebraic scheme. Let us now introduce the attitudes of the Self, calling E extroversion and I1 introversion. Let us consider another algebraic Clifford Element E  I1  E30 (4.3) E30  1 means extroversion, otherwise E30  1 means introversion. Finally, let us consider another Clifford basic element. It takes in consideration states of explicit intermediation between extraversion E and Introversion I1 . We call it M , and We pose M  E10 (4.4) with the realization that it assumes E10  1 when the subject is in a state of equal superposition of pure extroverted and pure introverted condition while instead we have E10  1 otherwise. In this manner we have realized two basic features. The first is that by introducing the (4.1), we have fixed that the rational functions are opposites from each other and, considering the (4.2), we have admitted that also the irrational functions are opposites from each other. Obviously, consider that, using the (4.1) and the (4.2), we enter by Clifford algebra in a quantum bare bone skeleton of quantum mechanics. This is to say that rational as well as irrational functions now become to be considered having an irreducible intrinsic indetermination in their state. This is to say that the person has an ontological potentiality, a quantum superposition of alternatives, to be T or F becoming actually T or F when his Self is submitted to direct self or outside direct observation. The algebraic theorems given in point (1) fix the algebraic structure of such passages with Si representing the situation when the person has an ontological potentiality, a quantum superposition of alternatives, and N i,±1 when the Self is submitted to perform self or outside direct observation. The same thing happens for psychological functions S and I being the person in a superposition of such states (Operating the Clifford algebra Si) and becoming actually ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 845 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra S or I (operating in this case the algebra N i,±1 ) Obviously, the selection of the state T or F , and, respectively, S or I is only a matter of probability that is enhanced in favouring one psychological function respect to the other in dependence of the inner structure of his Self and of the context in which the self is under direct observation. This is the quantum scheme of the approach. It profoundly reformulates Jung theory under an ontological as well as epistemological profile. We have previously explained in detail such contents in points (1) and (2). As example, an important implication of our elaboration is that both superior and inferior functions coexist, and it is only a matter of our inner developed structure and of the instantaneous context that, probabilistically speaking, one function results prevailing on the other in our subjective dynamics. Fixed such important conceptual points, let us attempt to give soon some result confirming possibly that we are formulating a theory in a correct direction. Let us calculate the expectation value (mean value, of T , F , S , and I ). Looking at our basic relation of Clifford algebraic scheme of quantum mechanics given in the (2.3), we obtain immediately that  T  cos ,  F   cos ,  S  sen ,  I  sen (4.5) where  is an arbitrary angle ranging from   to  Let us schematize the results of the (4.5) in Fig.2. We obtain the behaviors of the expectation values for such psychological functions. F 1 I 2 T 1.0 3 S 4 5 6 7 8 0.6 0.2 -0.2 -0.6 -1.0 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 angle  ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 846 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra Fig. 2 Expectation values of the four psychological functions. It is easily observed that we obtain eight corresponding sections: 1) F>I>S>T 2) I>F>T>S 3) I>T>F>S 4) T>I>S>F 5) T>S>I>F 6) S>T>F>I 7) S>F>T>I 8) F>S>I>T They are in perfect accord with Jung theory. There is no doubt that this quantum approach reproduces perfectly the eight different proportions that were identified also by Jung theory when he characterized the superior and secondary psychological functions of a subject. Remember that he outlined that we just have them in different proportions. We have a superior function which we prefer and it is best developed in us, and a secondary function of which we are aware and we use in support of our superior function. The personality of a person conflicts if the Self has to realize two opponent functions in the same attitude. Here it is one of the interesting features of such obtained results obtained. The interest is on one hand under the profile of the scientific investigation but, on the other hand, it is of great interest also under the applicative diagnostic perspective. Let us explain such concept in detail. As we know, we may experimentally estimate the values of T , F , S , I as always performed in the standard cases by the test. The important difference is that we know the corresponding analytical expressions as predicted by the (4.5). Consequently, for each subject investigated we may now reconstruct his pattern in the Fig.2 and thus establishing this profile in the case of normal subjects as well as in the cases of pathological conditions, differentiating also the possible different stages of the considered pathology. This is a perspective that in our opinion delineates a possible advance of valuable interest. This last comment completes our exposition on the Jung four psychological functions as elaborated by a bare bone skeleton of quantum mechanics using the Clifford algebraic approach. Now the attitudes of the Self: The different attitudes of the Self may be extraversed or introversed and they have been quantum mechanically algebraically expressed by us in the (4.3) and in the (4.4). According to our quantum language, as previously for the four psychological functions, also here the situation is now conceptually reformulated respect to traditional Jung theory. We may have pure extroversed or pure introversed states but we may also have the ontological true potentiality, signed from irreducible indeterminism, of potential superpositions of extroverted and introverted states. Here, this feature is particularly enhanced since we have a precise algebraic element that characterizes it. Again we have two different Clifford algebraic structures, given respectively by Si and by N i,±1. Remember, in particular, that we have here also ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 847 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra the Clifford algebraic element M  E10 to which we attribute the numerical value of –1 if the subject always collapses to a possible state of extraversion or intraversion while it still remains to be +1 if the subject remains in an uncollapsed state of equal superposition of pure introvetrted and pure extroverted states. Also in this case we may calculated the mean values obtaining  E  cos ,  I   cos ,  M  sen (4.6) Under the view point of the experimental investigation we may repeat here all that we have previously outlined for the psychological functions. We may explore the attitudes of the Self and his balancing. It is relevant to outline here further the importance of such acquired possibilities under the basic theoretical profile of the elaboration as well as in the case of analyzing possible implications under the clinical profile. Now a step one: It may be useful to repeat here the notion of quantum entanglement that we have also prospected previously. Using very simple terms we may say that quantum entanglement is a pure quantum phenomenon in which the states of two or more objects or entities anyway separated, remain linked together so that one object can no longer be described without considering its counterpart. A quantum interconnection maintains between the two components also for any space distance separation between the two separated objects, leading to a net correlation between measurable observable properties of such two or more components. We need to re outline here that such very extraordinary property of correlation at distance relates only quantum entanglement that is exhibited only from systems subjected to the principles and to the rules of quantum mechanics. We need the previously mentioned Bell inequality. If it is violated, we have quantum entanglement. Our attempt is to verify if or not Jung theory has a possible quantum formulation. By this way we may admit that human subjects in some conditions realize quantum entanglement in the sense that psychological functions are entangled with Self-attitudes. We may write Bell inequality linking psychological functions and attitudes. With clear evidence of the used symbolism, we write in this case the Bell inequality in this manner E( M ,T )  E( M , S )  E( E ,T )  E( E , S )  2 (4.7) E states for expectation value. M ,T , S , E state respectively for intermediation and attitudes M , and E and T and S for psychological functions. This last result completes our exposition. Again we retain to be important to re-outline here that the first elaboration of this matter was given by Reinhard Blutner, and Elena Hochnadel [10]. 4. Materials and Methods ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 848 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra All we know about the MBTI that is to say the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. We may use MBTI to classify the personality of the subject adopting some predefined sentences. We decided to use the MBTI to submit the (4.7) to experimental verification in order to evaluate if or not we may speak about quantum entanglement between psychological functions and attitudes in human subjects. We decided to perform an experiment that we thought in the following manner. Using the sentences given in the MBTI we prepared possible pairs of sentences ( M ,T ),( M , S ),( E ,T ),( E , S ) coupling them in a computer archive. Male and female normal subjects were selected with age ranging from twenty to thirty years old. Each subject was subject to simultaneous sentences ( M ,T ), soon after ( M , S ) , then ( E ,T ) and finally ( E ,S ) , each pair of sentences given to subject after a short time from the other. Each pair of sentences was selected at random by the computer from the previously arranged archive and given to the subject. In this manner we calculated E( M ,T ), E( M , S ), E( E ,T ), E( E , S ) for each subject. For each person we repeated the experiment three times selecting at random every time the pairs of sentences. Each administration was given to the subject after a period of at rest for the subject of about 15 minutes. 5. Results We are in the condition to confirm some results. A group of three psychologists, specialized in the administration of psychological tests, were active in the experiment. One of them found that the Bell inequality was violated in the 59% of the investigated cases, the other psychologist found instead Bell violation in the 63% of cases, and the third psychologist found a violation in the 72% cases. Such results agree in a satisfactory manner with those that we obtained in a previous preliminary experimentation that we performed. The experimental indication seems quite clear. Subjects showed in percent a violation of Bell inequality and this is to say that in such case psychological functions and attitudes in these subjects gave quantum entanglement. It emerges a quantum model of personality theory. Under a strict psychological profile, a plastic behaviour is observed where psychological functions, attitudes and their quantum entanglement explain a decisive role in the subject mental dynamics. Therefore it becomes very interesting to deepen what is the role of quantum entanglement in such dynamical profile, and this the object of our subsequent current research. References [1] Conte E. A Reformulation of von Neumann’s Postulates on Quantum Measurement by Using Two Theorems in Clifford Algebra. Int. Journ. Theor. Phys. 2010; 49: 587–614, available on line, DOI : 10.1007/s10773-009-0239-z. Conte E., A proof of vov Neumann’s postulate in quantum mechanics, America Institute of Physics, Quantum Theory, 2010; 201-205. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 849 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 831-849 Conte, E., Todarello, O., Laterza, V., Khrennikov, A. Y., Mendolicchio, L. & Federici, A. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Inequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra For a Clifford algebra of non commuting elements see: Ilamed Y., Salingaros N., Algebras with three anticommuting elements. I. Spinors and Quaternions. 1981; 22: 2091-2095 [2] Schneider J., Quantum measurement act as a "speech act", arXiv:quant-ph/0504199v1 [3] Conte E. On the logical origins of quantum mechanics demonstrated by using Clifford algebra: a proof that quantum interference arises in a Clifford algebraic formulation of quantum mechanics, in press on Electronic Journal of Theoretical Physics Conte E. On the Logical origins of quantum mechanics, in press on Neuroquantology Conte E. On the logical origins of quantum mechanics, to be submitted to Inter. Journ. of Theor. Phys. Conte E. On the logical origins of quantum mechanics demonstrated by using Clifford algebra, PhilPapers, http://philpapers.org/archive/CONOTL.1.doc [4] Orlov J.F. The wave logic of quantum mechanics. Int. Journ. Theor. Phys. 1978; 17, (8): 585-598, The Wave Logic of Consciousness: A Hypothesis. Int. Journ. Theor. Phys., 1982; 21, (1): 37-53, The logical origins of quantum mechanics. Annals of Physics 1994; 234 (2): 245-259, Peculiarities of Quantum Mechanics: Origins and Meaning. 1996; 1-52 arXiv:quant-ph/9607017v1 [5] For a deepen discusiion on this matter also with relation to cognitive entities see Aerts D., Aerts S, Broekaert J., Gabora L., The violation of Bell inequalities in the macroworld, Found. Phys., 2000; 30: 1387-1414 [6] For details see also ref. [5] Pitowsky I., Quantum Probabilità –Quantum logic, Lecture Notes in Physics 321, Sprinter –Verlag , New York 1989. [7] Mumford D., The dawing of the age of stochasticity. In Mathematics: Frontiers and Perspectives, Am. Math. Soc., 2000; 460-472 Yaynes E.T., Probabilità Thoery, The logic of science, 2003; Cambridge University Press, [8] Lefebvre V. THE LAW OF SELF-REFLEXION: A possible unified explanation for the three different psychological phenomena http://cogprints.org/2927/ [9] Hu, H & Wu M. Spin-Mediated Consciousness Theory, 2002. arXiv:quant-ph/0208068v5. Also see, Hu. H. & Wu M., Spin as Primordial Self-referential Process. NeuroQuantology 2004;.2, (1): 41-49. [10] Blutner R., Hochnadel E.. Two Qubits for CG. Jung’s theory of personality, 2009, preprints available on line (www.illc.uva.nl/Publications/ResearchReports/PP-2009-03.text.pdf) and Cognitive Systems Research, 2010; 11: 243-259. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

899 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World Article Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World Christopher Holvenstot* Abstract Severe seasonal depression entails the yearly collapse and reconstruction of a functional, useable, meaningful world. This radical annual transformation provides a unique perspective onto fundamental conscious processes by illuminating the cognitive elements and dynamics behind the construction and deconstruction of self-models and worldmodels. Key words: self-model, world-model, world-modeling, cognition, cognitive scaffolding, consciousness, seasonal depression, S.A.D., transformational experience, meaning-making, meaninglessness, empiricism, existentialism, absolute truth. Transformational experiences are most often interpreted as mystical and are conveyed in a familiar narrative – the seeker, after performing the correct privations and meditations (or after ingesting the right chemicals) attains to the profound experience, a full loss of self, a vision unto the oneness of everything. The result is a sense of compassion that the seeker (now turned visionary) is compelled to manifest in his or her life. My own transformational experience is very similar: the loss of self, the experience of boundless space, and the arrival at compassion; but it is not the result of a choice to experience an alternative perspective. I am not a seeker. And, rather than a diligent struggle toward a bright shining moment of clarity, more diligent energies than I can possibly tally have been spent struggling in the other direction – crawling and clawing my way out of an interminable mind-state of no self, no world, no time, no distinctions, no objects, no judgments, no meanings. The truth of the matter is no one can function in that realm. It’s a great place to visit but you would not want to live there. When dragged there and kept there against one’s will, one must fight one’s way out or perish. My unwilling transformation occurs annually, is long and arduous, and has typically resulted in a full loss of self and the full deconstruction of reality. Though I am skeptical of all narratives, the psychological one gives a reasonable context for its explanation in the diagnosis of severe seasonal depression. My case, according to the clinical explanation, is exacerbated by the negligence and violence of unstable parents, by an extended period of *Correspondence: E-Mail: cholvenstot@yahoo.com Christopher Holvenstot is an independent researcher in consciousness studies. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 900 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World overlapping traumas, but is probably most acutely affected by an unusually high degree of physical isolation in the period from my birth until my 4th year of life. Whether or not the clinical narrative can fully account for it, the experience I have is of a fully integrated world of meaning and interconnectivity in the summer that in the winter is replaced by a realm of radical meaninglessness and disconnect, a loss of feeling, a loss of a sense of self, a loss of familiarity (of place and people), a loss of recognition (of what objects and substances are for, including food), and, at its nadir, a temporary loss of the ability to physically function – a catatonic state. In the spring everything shifts toward unification and reintegration while in the fall everything shifts toward disintegration and non-existence. First there is a world, then there is no world, then there is a world, on and on, year after year. The perspective I have after many decades of such transformations is one of deep empathy toward the entirety of the living world, and is a perspective that provides a useful analytical angle into the issue of conscious processes and dynamics − particularly the role of conscious processes and dynamics in the modeling of a useable world. Whereas most people effortlessly employ the hidden assumptions necessary to subconsciously create and maintain a seamless, stable, functioning model of the world, from a very young age I have had to be fully conscious of the construction of a useable world and I have had to remain consciously active in its repair and maintenance. These constructions become effortless in the spring and summer months when I feel fully caught up in them but are impossible to maintain in midwinter when after considerable struggle, I must inevitably surrender to the catatonic state. Up until a handful of years ago, the condition had a distinct bipolar element. I could neither imagine nor plan for how my mind would be in the winter when it was summer and I could neither imagine nor plan for how my mind would be in summer when it was winter. The two mindsets are radically different and I could not see a whole year using either one. Until recently, the two parts of the year were never connected in my thinking. Many years of therapy were instrumental in overcoming that bipolarity. My therapist reflected my winter self back to me in summer and my summer self back to me in winter. I learned to incorporate the two mindsets into a single understanding of who I am. This has led in recent years to noticeable improvements, a gradual diminishment in the severity of the experience, and an ability to incorporate my experience of two radically different mindstates into a useful analysis of cognitive processes. As a result of the cyclical and bipolar nature of S.A.D. and as a result of its extreme formulation within me, I have experienced the commonly shared world-model that seems so self-evident to everyone else, from the inside, and then the outside, and then the inside, and then the outside – so many times that it is impossible for me to hold the same view of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 901 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World reality that others do. Though I would love to be able to, I do not and cannot hold the same assumptions. A lifelong necessity of having to fabricate a functioning version of reality on my own renders it more obvious to me why our world-models should be constructed the way they are, how they come to be constructed thus, and why certain assumptions work so wonderfully well. I understand the purpose of such a construction and I do not assume any of its conceptual elements to be givens or absolutes or inherent truths in the way that nearly everyone else does. By simply having to maneuver my given circumstances I have inadvertently become an expert in the art and science of world-modeling. Perhaps more keenly than others, I see the central importance of creature-specific world-modeling processes in the existence of all sentient entities. Seeing the vital cognitive dimension of awareness and intention as central in all life processes gives cause for a deep concern regarding the state of the living world. It is quite easy to dismiss my perspective as a diagnosable clinical condition, which in a very real sense it is, for it would naturally interfere with anyone’s ability to survive as an individual much less to function as a socially and economically viable one. My own survival is through sheer luck: of friendship, of circumstances, and in an odd, sad way I was quite lucky it started so early in my life. It is harder for adults who have never experienced major depression to contextualize episodes of complete disintegration, of complete emptiness, of absolute meaninglessness, which by the meager pseudo-philosophical standards of the prevailing market-driven culture is a shameful, unforgiveable failure – people kill themselves in the face of it. I have been contextualizing this disintegration and reintegration since childhood. I have solid habits to see myself through, and I have many well-worn methods for hiding my efforts, even from my closest friends. This back and forth world-view transformation has innumerable downsides (to put it mildly), but there are two small upsides: a clear-eyed perspectival locus located a considerable distance from our common muddled workaday assumptions about reality, and, as mentioned above, a useful non-standard view into the function and dynamics of conscious processes and their role in the task of creating a creature-appropriate, taskappropriate, milieu-appropriate world-model. By describing the experience of this annual transformation I hope to illustrate how a view into these few upsides can have considerable value in the development of a field of consciousness studies. The perspective I am left with after 40 to 50 transformational episodes can be helpful in illuminating the subject of consciousness, primarily by providing an example of world-modeling that may prove useful in the eventual development of a basic model of the process itself. I attempt here to illustrate the transformational experience and the uses of the perspective it provides. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 902 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World Please note that seasonal depression, even if it is the best way to describe my transformation, is inaptly named. The winter depression is one small portion of a cycle that encompasses the entire year. The day to day changes in this cycle tend to be small, slow, and subtle, and they do not become the concern of the clinical realm until the changes interfere with successful functioning, as it especially does at its midwinter nadir. In its most severe form it is not so subtle. I become functionally frozen. This freeze is not from fear or anxiety (although both play a major role leading up to my surrender to catatonia). I simply do not recognize my own body as relevant and I cannot make sense of the objects, noises, and textures I perceive. There is still a view from somewhere but that perspectival locus isn’t attached to anything that can make sense of the physical space, or of time; nor can it recognize the relevance of a self/world boundary. The perspective is still from a kind of somewhere, but it can only be described as nowhere. It is not a place with shareable reference points. Were I not dragged to this mind-state against my will, it might look beautiful. I receive visual information from the location of my eyes, however, that location is not privileged or important or integral to the experience I am having in that state, and the information or stimuli is not of distinctions and relationships; the world is not ordered in a recognizable or useful way, it just… is. Had I chosen to be there, had I come in the proper frame of mind and with the pre-expectation of interpreting it spiritually, or even if I just knew that I could control the experience and leave it when I wished, it would indeed be illuminating. But because I have seen this whole cycle consistently destroy the momentum of my relationships, my education, my career, etc.; because it strips away all the things I need to be a human I have tended to regard it as a loathsome, pernicious sea of meaninglessness – a view of nothing, the void. The I is not there, the world is not there. Awareness persists but there is no context to latch it to, or rather the context is nothing, which is just what everything is when there are no distinctions. In such a state there is nothing to be done, no way to do it, and no available self to observe on its behalf, no available self to participate or to perform. Catatonia is the inevitable result. This state can last from a few hours to a week or more and can recur a few times each winter. The time element does not register while I am in that state and can only be worked out in retrospect. While in it, it feels eternal, and that eternal feeling is what I most feared growing up, whenever I felt myself sliding into its grip. It feels like free-falling into a deep hole, and once I’m in it I will be there forever. And in terms of the logic of the experience itself, that is entirely true. From inside that mind-state it is eternal, endless, exit-less, and I am there forever – frozen, free-floating/free-falling – in a void. But, by the terms and logic of the regular workaday world, it does not last forever. The first useful and very beautiful concept that arises in me, to stir me from these messy and debilitating episodes, is the notion of a boundary between my body and the world. I am ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 903 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World here. I am this and not that. This conceptualization arises in me suddenly and shockingly. And in order to persist as an entity, in order to maintain the self/world boundary, I must do something about it, usually something to obtain nutrition. A big problem arises. The doing has to be done in a particular matrix of phenomenal parameters that I have to work out from scratch – my mind is supremely addled, completely empty of content. I have to work out a matrix of doing suitable to what it is I find I am (a bizarre and impossibly heavy rubbery body, with a spine down the middle, long bendable limbs that are frayed at the ends, some of the frayed parts can grasp, thank heaven). Whatever matrix of doing I configure in relation to this entity must also be suitable to the purpose. The doing must effect the movement of this particular type of entity toward a nutrient rich environment. Like any lazy single modern urban male, I have a standing delivery order for southern fried chicken with mashed potatoes and garlic spinach on speed dial with a credit card on file. But nothing is familiar and nothing makes sense. Figuring to push the correct button, getting the corpus to the door, waiting for the downstairs buzzer, pushing the lobby entry button, manipulating the apartment door, the grunted interaction with a delivery-being, are all extremely complicated conceptually. I am not always able and not always willing. I don’t always know the meaning of the objects, the history of the place, or who and what I am. I have to become a being and that being has to become an amateur scientist with his conceptual tools ideologically limited to the classical realm. I must coordinate the interaction of a particular kind of body with the phenomenal parameters of a particular kind of environment in a causal-mechanical relationship. I have to keep force-focusing the otherwise free-floating/free-falling awareness onto just this one particular corpus in this one particular kind of matrix of properties, to achieve one particular kind of thing – nutrition. I must formulate and include the element of linear time because all the actions have to occur in a specific order to add up to a successful behavioral episode with which to achieve that nutrition. Push button to order food, body to door, listen for buzz, push entry button, open door, grunt, close door, food into hole, gnash with teeth, swallow. It can only work in that order so an idea of order is vital. The concept of linear order is my meal ticket, literally. I must hold onto this ticket for future use. There seems little room for failure and no room whatsoever for a free-floating/free-falling view of nothingness nor for a view onto its true opposite, the infinite phenomenal properties and characteristics that are irrelevant to the vital task at hand. Awareness must align with the body and stay there. The aware body must focus every available mental and caloric resource into a narrow tunnel-vision range of physical properties and causal dynamics. This range and this focus and this purpose (control, certainty) are the simplified origin of empirical science and I cannot afford to be distracted from its basic tenets, and I cannot afford to take notice of anything else… except for the other thing. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 904 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World The only other very vital thing is that I must formulate and hold onto the notion that it is worth it to make the effort to get the corpus to the door, to get the food, to put the horrifying dead stuff into the horrifying hole in my horrifying face. In order to persist I must actively choose to believe that some larger meaning will one day reveal itself to put this grotesque and incomprehensible struggle into a more obvious context of purpose and meaning. I must choose to trust that the future will provide a good purpose and a good meaning for whatever is happening in the not-so-good-seeming present. I must have faith. Without any sense of history or future, without memory or hope, without any comprehension of how I could ever escape the small self-contained circle of illogic I find myself in, I must project forward to an unknown realm that I will never reach. I must project an imaginary conceptual matrix of non-specific meanings and purposes that will function to compel me onward. I must build an imaginary conceptual matrix in which hope is possible. Unlike the causal-physical realm that I am fabricating as I go and to which I am aligning all my actions, I do not ever need to reach this other theoretical realm or to fully understand the details of its inherently good meanings and purposes. The projection is the purpose. The ultimate utility of this forward projection is the imaginary reverse projection of meaning from this imagined meaning-laden future, reflecting positive meaning back here into the meaning-absent present. I can do this forward/backward time trick because I have just worked out a linear sense of time to perform the vital actions necessary for successful nutrition. The timeline concept reifies the whole process. I can picture nutrition in the linearly defined future and I can use that future as the backdrop for the projection of positive meaning and I can conflate the two things (food = hope). And I have to do this. To get to the future it has to be formulated as desirable. I have to want it. Me, the organism that I now claim as myself (by aligning my awareness to the boundary of its morphology) must find a way to want to persist into the next few moments, and then the next… and this forward/backward projection of meaning trick is the tidiest and most economical solution. I have to build, own, and maintain the assumption that participation in this self-limited matrix of boundaries, dimensions, causation, and time is well worth the cost. If I do not do this I fall back into catatonia, remain unfed, lose my boundary, die. That is the alternative. Without a value-scale to judge my alternatives, I could make the wrong choice. I haven’t yet got a value-scale and the choice is far too complicated for my simple addled mind. I project the working-out of the all the important details of meaning and purpose unto some other unreachable unknowable time and location. I defer the question. I assume for now that the answer from the future place and time will be a beneficent “yes”. I choose the struggle of life by formulating and projecting an equation that pre-decides the choice of life for me. It is the simplified origin of religion. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 905 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World In short, in order to live, the fundamental equation is this: I must actively align awareness with the self/world boundary of the body, I must coordinate my morphology in a causalmechanical way, and I must project the possibility of meaningfulness to a time and place somewhere ahead of me since it is not available in the present place and time. Every year I must work this out anew and on my own. I must grope my way, initially without memory, without recognition, or habits, or mental resources. I have to rebuild the world from these few cognitive elements. It is exhausting and every year I think I am done for, that I cannot survive the eternal self-less, world-less state (which is true, the self that thinks I am done for is indeed obliterated). Every year I think that I cannot ever climb my way out of its grip (also true, within the circle of logic particular to that mind-state all physical and metaphorical actions become not just impossible and irrelevant but impossible and irrelevant forever). Every year I think I simply cannot do it (also true, nothing can be done in the eternal nothingness), and yet somehow I do do it. I eventually build my way back to the workaday world. Unfortunately there is nothing there to remind me that I’ve done it before or how I did it. And yet by logic I am not actually without mental resources. Though I have to work out the details of the physics and the meanings, I intuitively know I need to press the button for food and to get the body to the door and to put the food into the facehole, to chew it and to swallow it. It feels new each time and yet an observer would see that I do have resources, assumptions, and habits that function on my behalf regardless of my inability to illuminate their source. Yet it is useful to recount the process just as I perceive it. In the reconstruction of my world from a catatonic state a number of conceptual elements emerge as fundamental: 1. The self/world boundary 2. The entity described within this boundary 3. The awareness aligned with this entity 4. This entity’s boundary awareness intentionally focused on a specific matrix of creatureappropriate dimensional space 5. This entity’s boundary and spatial awareness intentionally focused on causal relationships within that space 6. This entity’s boundary, spatial, and causal awareness intentionally focused on a lineartimed ordering of causal events 7. This entity’s projection of the positive valuation of participating in the format for biological survival that is mapped out by these combined uses of intentional awareness. Only with these fundamental cognitive elements in place can I begin to reckon with the details relevant to persisting as a living thing. Because this process began long before I had ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 906 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World words for what I was doing I recognize that these awareness types are not just linguistic concepts. I need this basic world-model structure, this matrix of interrelated awarenesstypes (and the concepts which represent them) in order that my persisting will not only makes sense as a purpose but is thereby rendered possible, and even inevitable. Persisting becomes the explicit purpose of the reality I seem to create from scratch, a reality that I make possible but which makes me possible in return. To persist I must create a model that creates a reality of its own. A spectrum of values emerges related to the persisting purpose and the values become increasingly articulated and specific. Anything that supports persisting is value-tagged as good; anything that thwarts persisting is value-tagged as bad. Further distinctions must be made in that some good things are only good in certain contexts, certain amounts, certain times, certain situations, etc. I build a roster of more and more complex meanings that are fully dependent on space, time, and causality concepts and which are directly related to my persisting purpose. Objects and noises begin to make more sense when their values, uses, and meanings can be discerned in this purpose-related way. When the objects and noises begin making sense the context for the objects and noises, the apartment itself, begins to feel safe and more familiar. My body then begins to make more sense as well and my presence becomes reified by all the objects, noises, and contexts for things that are now recognized as relating to me, to my body, to my purpose, to my life. The logic and interrelationship of things, including the element of time, begin to take on a fuller and richer shape. The complexity and the feeling of familiarity of this realm slowly and steadily grow. Over time, the recognition of objects and relationships is increasingly enriched in crosspollinating counterpoint, and this triggers associated memories and emotional responses to things that also begin increasing in richness and complexity. Once these emotions, memories, inner voice, and interrelated meanings are in place and fully activated they begin to take over and have their own effortless momentum. I let myself into the flow of it. I let myself believe that the substructure of a self, plus assumptions about volitional capabilities, plus values related to these assumptions, and then the emotions, memories and interrelated meanings that accrue upon these, all combine to describe inherent features of an actual world rather than a self-fabricated mental construct self-designed for a specific purpose. For the sake of cognitive economy I invest in the model I make as if it were an accurate description of the world out there. A sense of easy movement, meaningfulness, and purposefulness arises, swells in intensity, reaches a glorious peak sometime in midsummer, and then the thing arcs and begins to bend slowly back toward the other direction again with incremental losses and disconnections, becoming ever more debilitating as the winter progresses, and I am finally and unwillingly surrendered again to nothingness and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 907 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World baseline catatonia. It is a tough fight in either direction, to build the world on the way up, and then to defend its construction and use against constant incomprehensible and inconsolable losses on the way down. And I have always, since I was small, to be building a reasonable facsimile on the side, a parallel world with which to fake my way through thick and thin. Among the many things I had to figure out on my own as a child was how to fake it when the purposes, meanings, concepts and interconnectivity of things were not registering, which was about half the year. I learned how to build a facsimile cognitive structure that would at the very least allow me to pass as a member of the same world as everyone else. I had to pay attention. I had to observe and cultivate behaviors. I had to find a way into the logic of behavioral assumptions. I employed consciously and by force what others were employing subconsciously by habits and assumptions. It is an exhausting process to have to think everything through based on a common logic that I do not naturally posses myself; and so much of it seemed so nonsensical, yet it was far better to defer to what was given than to draw attention to myself by speaking up about the obvious flaws in people’s assumptions. I’ve hidden this process and my perspective all my life as best I can by aping appropriate behaviors and responses whenever possible. But not having had a word or explanation or forum for it all these years, it was not a shareable thing anyway. Because it is so gargantuan a difficulty, my habit has been to isolate myself in winter. The constant construction of the world and the necessary astute observation of reactions to my attempts at normalcy, all masked in secrecy and feigned nonchalance, are supremely stressful at a time of year when I have dwindling amounts of physical and mental energy with which to cope with basic functions. As the winter season progresses social situations become infinitely too complex to interpret and even the closest of companions that give such pleasure in summer start to slip away. I feel them falling away into a familiar realm of unfamiliarity, the winter place where the very same characters that so enriched my existence through summer become complex problems in exhausting equations I can no longer decipher. People in my life have quietly adjusted to this summer sociability and winter isolation without ever questioning me much about it. In the summer my nearest and dearest are perceived as fully integrated aspects of my own heart. By the midwinter portion of the cycle all people have become just skin, hair, teeth, un-interpretable noise, and unpredictable movement, which fills me with nervous fear and revulsion, and this is usually at a point in the cycle when I have the least amount of energy of the kind that is required to mask actual reactions and ape normal ones. I am full of such energy in the summer when I do not necessarily need it, and I am drained of it in winter when it would most save me from the humiliation of exposing my embarrassing, world-destroying emptiness. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 908 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World The weeks surrounding midwinter are the most difficult. Though many people find Christmas stressful, I have found it unspeakably nightmarish, even in the presence of people I know to be truly lovely. But I can absolutely see, particularly why northern Europeans would require a bright and colorful midwinter holiday in which to assert a sudden culture-wide ethos of communal love, generosity, and interconnectedness, precisely when, in the grayest gloom and chill, we are least able to call forth those vital elements within ourselves on our own. We institute a means to enforce good cheer precisely when we need it most. My seasonal cycle, though severe, is just an exaggeration of a regular seasonal cycle quite typical for those of northern European descent. Many people notice within themselves an increase of vitality in the summer, a dwindling of enthusiasm in winter. Christmas, falling un-coincidentally at the nadir of midwinter darkness (with the vibrant use of lights and the colors of blood and verdure, the narratives regarding the birth of our salvation, the intoxicating nog version of mother’s milk, free gifts on a magic sleigh, the incessant singing, the intense desire to believe in miracles, etc.) is but a thinly veiled survival strategy for a complex social organism that cannot hibernate but generally does not winter well. There is no other excuse for such excesses. Though I am usually too far gone, it clearly would do wonders for me were I only mildly fallen at that time of year. Given this cycle in this clime, it is clear why northern European philosophers tie their understanding of nothingness (which more frequently arises in introspection at the winter season) to the bare, cold, dark, dead, ice-covered, winter landscape. Though meaninglessness is an entirely neutral affair (simply an absence of meaning) I can see how it would be culturally/geographically interpreted as negative, as an absence of life, as antilife. I can see how our deep-seated assumptions, built upon seasonal rhythms and the cultural, biophysical, and psychological reaction to coldness and darkness, inform everything about the experience of a loss of meaning – from its perceived characteristics to its diagnosis and treatment. Despite the obvious fact that the culture itself (particularly in its present über-materialistic self-enthralled manifestation) provides the context in which experiences of meaninglessness would by logic inescapably arise, the cultural impulse is to medicate and isolate the errant individuals who blasphemously confess to experiencing it rather than to analyze the social forces and assumptions which create the experience and define its characteristics. Our impulse as a cultural unity is to proactively deny the possibility of meaninglessness by denying the legitimacy of the experience in others and quarantining the crazy ones who cannot sufficiently hide the reality of meaninglessness from the rest of us. The bulk of my own dilemma, though primed by unfortunate circumstances, has quite a lot to do with the culture’s fear-based reaction to meaninglessness, the culture’s inability to allow room for the legitimacy of that experience, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 909 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World and the culture’s inability to allow those who can comprehend the neutrality of meaninglessness to speak with any authority about it from the useful perspective it provides. The philosophical limitations of the culture disallow us to comprehend and countenance it in its pure and simple form as a neutral space of no meaning – meaninglessness as the natural and necessary backdrop for the construction of all meaning. The culture is as yet unready to acknowledge a space of no-meaning due to an unwillingness to reevaluate the outdated notion of absolute truth. Thus, if I want my own experience to be understood I must transcribe it into one of two meaning-laden, meaning-inherent options that people can actually hear. And it must be in a narrative format with a beginning, a middle, and an end, regardless of the fact that seasonal depression is part of a common human and animal rhythm with a year-long cycle that has no beginning and no end. In order to be heard I can illustrate the change of states from summer to winter, starting in the full bloom of meaningful interconnections and ending up in the existential horror-show of catatonia, which has a distinct emotional outcome. Or I can tell it from the other emotional direction where I am delivered from the existential horror-show to a healthy normal(ish) experience of interrelatedness. People demand meaning-laden versions of meaninglessness; they require a context for no-context. The difference between the narrative telling of it and my actual experience is that I am not in a position to take the emotional reading of either meaning-laden narrative version as the final fact of the matter – I feel both versions but I cannot assume that either the winter to summer or the summer to winter narrative provide the correct emotional reading and I cannot assume that either the winter or the summer mental state is either normal or clinical. I must, in my own life and perspective, incorporate all of it as standard issue mental states and dynamics, and in so doing I am more able than others to see the construction and deconstruction of self and world without the kinds of narrative assumptions, psychological reductions, and emotional interpretations that others would inevitably read into it. To survive my own cognitive dynamics I have been obliged to create an interpretive perspective through which I can comprehend the construction and deconstruction of a useable world-model in its entirety, without emotional reads, without the culture’s fear of meaninglessness, and without the culture’s hidden assumptions – the unspoken cultural belief in the world’s supposed absolute truths and its supposedly inherent characteristics and meanings. I witness the personal and cultural creation of preferred phenomenal characteristics, qualities, truths, values, and meanings from a unique perspective. I am fully conscious of it. I see the scaffolding of awareness types, the purposes behind this scaffolding, and the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 910 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World meaning-making/meaning-projection processes with which we flesh out the scaffolding. All of it is necessary and vital to being a living thing. Our culture has very confused and complex self-deluding subterfuges regarding all aspects of this world-modeling process, particularly as regards meaning-making. We pretend we are not making meaning, that meaning does not exist, and/or that it is not important, while we simultaneously shape all our behaviors and goals based on the meanings we say are not there, are not important, do not exist, are not self-created. Because I am consciously aware of the processes I do not and cannot hide it from myself, or pretend I am not a part of its construction and projection, or pretend that the meanings are god-given or an inherent aspect of the external world. I can be both in it and of it. I can own meaning-making in a way most people cannot, precisely because I have learned in some respects to countenance meaninglessness. My experience has made me less afraid than most people to view the background blank-slate of meaninglessness onto which all of our personal and cultural meaning-making is being projected. In general, people pretend there is no such thing as meaninglessness (despite that every adult human has taken an occasional personal dip into its doubts, confusions, and culturally-predetermined existential despair). In a culture-wide world-view based on empirical precepts both meaning and meaninglessness are purported not to exist. We prefer to pretend that we are not involved in making or maintaining meanings because that would indicate that the meanings themselves are not inherent to the world, and as rational empiricists we could not possibly value or respect any meaning that we subjectively created and communally projected ourselves. Our cultural fear of meaninglessness is actually nothing more than a wellhidden fear of disappointed expectations: as a culture we naively expect inherent meaningfulness just as we naively expect absolute truths. The unspoken fear is that we could not possibly weather such disappointed expectations when in point-of-fact a cleareyed view unto the self-creation and projection of all meanings places the ball in our court as individuals and as a culture. We can take charge of the meaning-making process like never before, with conscious clarity, with pragmatic purpose and visionary intentions, rather than as a knee-jerk intuitive subconscious reaction to random historical events and circumstances. My non-standard perspective is entirely useless for getting me through the circumstances of ordinary life in a market-driven culture, but it is very useful in one small, yet important, interesting, and contentious area of contemporary life concerning the development of a field of consciousness studies. An interest in consciousness quickly brings one face to face with questions about the nature of reality. Our only available prospect onto any version of reality (including the empirical version) is through conscious processes coordinated to achieve specific models of reality for specific purposes. Our experience of reality is coISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 911 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World equal to our model-making capabilities, assumptions, purposes, and end-products. Unlike those with more standard experiences and normal psychological perspectives I can comprehend the basic modeling process from inside and out. I experience a seamless world of integrated meanings, beings, and purposes; and I experience the backstage cognitive scaffolding that goes into the construction of that seamless world. I see the process of world-modeling from the user’s perspective (from within a successfully integrated world of substances and meanings) and I see it from the contractor’s angle (in its incremental reconstruction from distinct components, from distinct incrementallymodified uses of awareness and intention). The transformational experience between noworld and world exposes the world-modeling and meaning-making processes and allows me the formation of a pragmatic analysis of conscious processes. Because I am able to see myself modeling the world for particular uses I cannot hold the common naïve assumptions that many others do about the absolute truths of any of the conceptual elements used in composing a functional world-model. Due to conscious firsthand experience of the backstage cognitive phases that lead up to and inform empirical assumptions, I do not and cannot assume the precepts of the scientific endeavor to be either absolute or of a fundamental nature. Similarly, due to a fully conscious awareness of the backstage cognitive phases that precede and lead directly to the spiritual impulse toward projected meaningfulness and specialness, I do not and cannot assume that religious explanatory parameters are absolute or of a fundamental nature either. I see the back-stage processes which lead me to the pragmatic use of empirical and religious assumptions, I see the extraordinary value of these assumptions in modeling a functional world, but even in my most indulgent summer surrender to the beauty of the world they create I do not and cannot regard their precepts as absolute truths in the way that most others do. (And it is not for lack of trying.) Moreover, I can see quite clearly how the empirical and spiritual explanatory assumptions would only confuse one’s analysis of consciousness when empirical and spiritual precepts are mistaken as absolute truths. It is clearly advantageous for creatures like us to convert empirical and spiritual assumptions into absolute truths in the mind, to invest in them in the fullest and simplest way possible. This absolute conversion (the investment in assumptions as if they were absolute truths rather than pragmatic, contingent, made-up truths) is a way of making the world-modeling process automatic, subconscious, intuitive, seamless, transparent, and cognitively economical. By investing in precepts as absolute truths the assumptions work on their own, supported and reified by subconscious, habitual, life-appropriate behaviors. While the empirical and spiritual impulses arise to maximize biological and sociological survival, and while the assumptions behind them are life-appropriate (and therefore good assumptions on both our personal and communal ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 912 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World value-scales), they are not intended or designed as the analytical means to discern the truth of our actual condition or to illuminate the backstage cognitive processes, the conceptual scaffolding, the dynamics of meanings and purposes, behind all conscious and subconscious acts of world-modeling. Our natural desire for a rational-empirical and intuitively-spiritual solution to the conundrums of consciousness compels us as a culture to project the empirical and spiritual avenues of analysis onto a realm of phenomena that fall far beyond the explanatory scope, purpose, and capabilities of empiricism and spiritual precepts. I understand the impulse to employ these two ideologies but I see the futility. Empirical and spiritual precepts are certainly useful as operational assumptions within the living world, providing advantageous causal-physical mastery of environmental circumstances, and providing an extremely advantageous existential over-valuation of the importance of our individual lives, our cultures, and our species − science and religion unquestionably provided us the control and confidence we needed to rise as a species and to comfortably exist as individuals. But they are not in the least bit useful in descriptions of our cognitive characteristics and dynamics. And like it or not, the cognitive dimension must now be included in any viable rendition of reality. Our fear of inevitable disappointment in our absolute expectations (the expectation of absolute empirical and spiritual truths) makes it all the more difficult to question the personal and cultural beliefs which forestall the development of a field of consciousness studies. The discomforting letting-go of absolutes, and the effect of this letting-go on the communal psyche, must be explored with honesty and clarity (and must be reinterpreted with more accurate and humane psychotherapeutic assumptions) if we are to move forward in our self-knowledge as a species, as a culture, as individuals, and particularly as an emerging field of consciousness studies. To understand the fundamental purpose, substance, and application of conscious processes in nature and in ourselves we must come to see ourselves as making models of the world that by their very nature are fungible, contingent, and artificial (non-absolute). And unlike in empirical explorations where subjectivity is the antithesis of objective truth, in consciousness studies we are obliged to embrace the fact that cognitive characteristics arise for no other reason (and in no other format) than to provide an autonomous entity with a subjective orientation in a specific socioenvironmental configuration-space. To empirically eliminate subjective perspectives in consciousness studies is to eliminate the basis, the purpose, the dynamics, the format, the experiential domain, and the experiential product of what it is we purport to be studying. This subjectivity vs. objectivity conundrum (which reduces to the mind/body problem in philosophy) seems formidable to many but is actually wonderful news. The culture’s ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 913 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 899-913 Holvenstot, C., Transformations of Self and World I: Modeling a World energetic new imperative to understand our conscious condition compels us to finally acknowledge and validate our cognitive, psychological, emotional, intuitional, intellectual, interrelative, inter-accommodative characteristics which are inherent to the inescapably entwined relationship between subject and object. We are now obliged to set terms and values for these relational characteristics and dynamics wherever they occur, rather than over-valuing mere causal forces and material substances. We are also obliged to honor and utilize cognitive and psychological variation, rather than invalidating unique perspectives by empirical consensus. And we are obliged to celebrate the meanings, associations, concepts, and relationships we individually and communally create through our varied cognitive and psychological characteristics and points of view. Throughout the course of the empirical project these vital and compelling aspects of individual and communal experiential reality (arguably our profoundest resources) have been proactively invalidated, treated as unreal, and therefore grossly undervalued. I support and commend JCER’s efforts to engage analyses of our conscious condition through a variety of unique vantage-points. A view into our conscious condition is best explored employing non-standard perspectives since these shed the most light on our otherwise invisible normal world-modeling processes. Until very recently I had never shared my condition and my experience of it with anyone outside a clinical setting. There has not been a proper forum for it. I hope this very personal revelation of mind-state transformations will inspire and encourage others to share the private configuration and analytical uses of their own unique inner landscape. I thank the visionary editorship of JCER for conceiving a format that combines highly personal transformational insights with consciousness-studies-appropriate interpretations (very clever!), and I am especially thankful to Greg Nixon for providing a safe, supportive haven for such valuable and meaningful explorations. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 338-341 Abraham, F. D. Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon’s Hollows of Experience: Derrida 338 Commentary Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon’s Hollows of Experience: Derrida Frederick D. Abraham* ABSTRACT My congratulations to Gregory Nixon for a very thorough and sophisticated essay, and my apologies for the rather hasty attempt to provide a hopefully relevant comment, for which opportunity I am grateful. Key Words: hollow, experience, Derrida. Nixon (2010) gives many of Derrida’s ideas important consideration. One of Derrida’s most important ideas relates to instability in language, where he starts with Heidegger’s concept of ‘sous rature’ to emphasize the fact that words often cannot adequately stand for that which they reference, that is, they are inadequate to make an exact reference or representation. The word sends us on a long chase for meaning. Heidegger’s concept of ‘sous rature’ (‘under erasure’) also emphasized extracting meaning from oppositions. A word gets erased but is left visible, i.e., as if crossed out, and one wrestles with the difference in the meaning of its presence and absence. Deconstruction goes further, more Heraclitian, in emphasizing the process of extracting meaning by transcending the apparent opposition. This is part of the process of Derrida’s concept of deconstruction, which Taylor characterizes thusly: “The guiding insight of deconstruction is that every structure—be it literary, psychological, social, economic, political or religious—that organizes our experience is constituted and maintained through acts of exclusion. In the process of creating something, something else inevitably gets left out. “These exclusive structures can become repressive—and that repression comes with consequences. In a manner reminiscent of Freud, Mr. Derrida insists that what is repressed does not disappear but always returns to unsettle every construction, no matter how secure it seems. As an Algerian Jew writing in France during the postwar years in the wake of totalitarianism on the right (fascism) as well as the left (Stalinism), Mr. Derrida understood all too well the danger of beliefs and ideologies that divide the world into diametrical opposites: right or left, red or blue, good or evil, for us or against us. He showed how these repressive structures, which grew directly out of the Western intellectual and cultural tradition, threatened to return with devastating consequences. By struggling to find ways to overcome patterns that exclude the differences that make life worth living, he developed a vision that is consistently ethical.” (Taylor, 2004) Surap’s characterization: "The method of deconstruction is connected to what Derrida calls the 'metaphysics of presence'. It is Derrida's contention that Husserl, along with almost all other philosophers, relies on the assumption of an immediately available area of certainty. The origin and foundation of most philosophers' theories is presence. In Husserl's case the search for the form of pure expression is at the same time Correspondence: Frederick D. Abraham, Waterbury Center, Vermont, USA. E-mail: frederick.d.abraham@gmail.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 338-341 Abraham, F. D. Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon’s Hollows of Experience: Derrida 339 a search for that which is immediately present; thus implicitly, by being present in an unmediated way and present to itself, it is undeniably certain. "Derrida, however, denies the possibility of this presence and in so doing removes the ground from which philosophers have in general proceeded. By denying presence, Derrida is denying that there is a present in the sense of a single definable moment which is 'now'. For most people, it the present is the province of the known. We may be unsure of what took place in the past, of what may take place in the future, or of what is taking place elsewhere, but we rely on our knowledge of the present, the here and now -- the present perceptual world as we are experiencing it. By challenging access to the present Derrida poses a threat to both positivism and phenomenology.” Surap, 1993, p. 35). And, from Poster: “[Foucault, Derrida, and Lyotard claim] that the quest for certain truth and the claim of having attained it are the greater dangers.The logocentric philosophical tradition, with its strong assertions about truth, is complicit, for them, in the disasters and abominations of the twentieth-century Western history. On this difficult, even tragic issue of the relation of politics to truth, poststructuralists in general strive for a cosmopolitan position that makes every effort to recognize differences, even uncomfortable or disagreeable ones, and for a theory of truth that is wary of patriarchal and ethnocentric tendencies that hide behind a defense of reason as certain, closed, totalized. Above all, poststructuralists want to avoid forms of political oppression that are legitimized by resorts to reason, as this kind of legitimation has been, in their view, one of the paradoxical and lamentable developments of recent history.” (Poster, 1989, p. 16). Whether language has instability or not, in Western history, is a discussion that goes back to the Greek Cosmologists. Xenophanes tried “to reconcile the antithetical interpretations of nature, first as an array of ever changing things [the Heraclitian view], and second as an infinite never changing substance [the Parmedian/Platonic view].” (Sahakian, History of Philosophy, p. 6) Philosophy has been debating this issue ever since. The cosmological debate was soon reflected in the concern for language (rhetoric), social action, and everyday and political relevance, exemplified by Protagoras. Nixon discusses the aspect of binaries in Derrida’s thought, and here are some additional ideas on binaries that reinforce his: “In my view, this is the real significance of the metaphors of the cyborg and cyberspace — not only did they embody the lived experience of information technology, but they also offered a means of reconceptualising that experience in potentially non-hierarchical and non-binary terms.” (Wolmark, p. 3). To which I have commented: “Postmodern literature, despite its great diversity, has a major theme of establishing the process of discourse, rather than dominating ideologies, as a means for providing a continuing flow of society toward equal opportunity and freedom from tyranny and discrimination. Wolmark’s (1999) commentary, which sets the theme of her book, seems to place science fiction literature as sharing some communality with this postmodern discourse. (This is cryptically buried in her terms, ‘nonhierarchical and non-binary’.) “I think Wolmark inherits this usage of the terms non-hierarchical and non-binary from French feminist, philosopher, playwright, and poet Hélène Cixous (Cixous& Clement, 1986). For Cixous, as for Jacques Derrida, oppositions (binaries) can be dangerous, a source of oppression. For those of us ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 338-341 Abraham, F. D. Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon’s Hollows of Experience: Derrida 340 involved (and many who are not so involved) in dynamical systems theory (see Schuldberg in Richards, 2007), we have a great deal of admiration for the Heraclitian model of oppositions as creating a process that produces a new dynamic of greater complexity (an attractor—a pattern of activity created by mutually interactive agents) that surpasses each component of the binary. “At the same time, we have to understand that the dynamical process may produce maladaptive or harmful cultural attractors, as well as desirable ones. This can happen especially when the relative strength of the influence of each part of the binary is asymmetrical. ‘A’ clearly dominates ‘B.’ This is the meaning of her term, ‘hierarchical’. A healthy social process should minimize the asymmetry of the binary to produce possibilities beneficial to all participants in the binary opposition. It is probably no coincidence that creative thought also goes beyond polarities and favors the complex thinker who can tolerate ambiguity (Montuori, Combs, & Richards, 2004).” (Abraham, 2007, pp. 248-9.) I am concerned with emanicipation, the program of critical theory, poststructurlism, philosophical hermeneutics, postcolonialism, and neopragmatism, whose ideas are syntonic with those of Gregory Nixon, as well as Mikael Bakhtin’s ideas of dialogue, heteroglossia, polyphony, and unfinalizability. “Russian philosopher and semiotician Mikhail Bakhtin‘s theory of "dialogue" emphasized the power of discourse to increase understanding of multiple perspectives and create myriad possibilities. Bakhtin held that relationships and connections exist among all living beings, and that dialogue creates a new understanding of a situation that demands change. In his influential works, Bakhtin provided a linguistic methodology to define the dialogue, its nature and meaning.” (Maranhão, 1990, p. 51.) “Dialogic relations have a specific nature: They can be reduced neither to the purely logical (even if dialectical) nor to the purely linguistic (compositional-syntactic). They are possible only between complete utterances of various speaking subjects… Where there is no word and no language, there can be no dialogic relations; they cannot exist among objects or logical quantities (concepts, judgments, and so forth). Dialogic relations presuppose a language, but they do not reside within the system of language. They are impossible among elements of a language”. (Bakhtin, 1986, p. 117.) Since my concern is with emancipation, and the role of instability in empowering cultural change, I do not mean to imply that all social and cultural bifurcations end up with improved social conditions. Cultural dynamics often involve institutions, which tend to resist change, and that something needs to unstabilize them for progress, and that this is a never-ending process. The more oppressive and conservative a culture, the more unbearable it becomes, and it thereby seeds the roots of either its own destruction or its retrenchment. Social philosophies give us a more mature metaperspective which guide the discourse. Moreover, these perspectivesshould be founded not upon ideologies and fixed interpretations of nature, humans, and society, but on discourse and the tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty. My congratulations to Gregory Nixon for a very thorough and sophisticated essay, and my apologies for the rather hasty attempt to provide a hopefully relevant comment, for which opportunity I am grateful. References Abraham, F.D. (2007). Cyborgs, Cyberspace, Cybersexuality: The Evolution of Everyday Crativity.In R. Richards (Ed.), Everyday Creativity and New Views of Human Nature.Washington: American Psychological Association. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 338-341 Abraham, F. D. Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon’s Hollows of Experience: Derrida 341 Abraham, F.D. (in press). Media Ecology, Globalization, & Emancipation: Beyond the Carnivalesque. LUMINA, rd journal of the Philosophical Association of the Visayas and Mindanao, Philippines, to be presented at their 33 Annual Conference, May 29, 2010. http://www.blueberry-brain.org/chaosophy/Media%20Ecology%20Globalization%20Emancipation%20v3.pdf Bakhtin, M. M., Holquist, M., and Emerson, C. (1986). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays.Austin: University of Texas Press ISBN 0292720467. Cixous, H., & Clément, C. (1986). Sorties. In The newly born woman.Manchester: Manchester. Maranhão, T. (1990).The Interpretation of Dialogue. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0226504336. Montuori, A., Combs, A., & Richards, R. (2004). Creativity, consciousness, and the direction for human development. In D. Loye (Ed.), The great adventure: Toward a fully human theory of evolution (pp. 197236). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Nixon, G. M. (2010). Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. Poster, L. (1989). Critical Theory and Poststructuralism.Ithica: Cornell. Sahakian, W.S. (1968). History of Philosophy. New York: HarperCollins. nd Surap, M. (1993). Post-structuralism and Postmodernism, 2 ed. Athens: Georgia. Taylor, M. C. (2004). “What Derrida Really Meant.” http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/14/opinion/14taylor.html?ex=1098772231&ei=1&en=614d4201c8942e7b Wolmark, J. (Ed.). (1999). Cybersexualities. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

782 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 782-784 Smith, S. P. Review of Manjir Samanta-Laughton's Book: Punk Science: Inside the Mind of God Book Review Review of Manjir Samanta-Laughton's Book: Punk Science: Inside the Mind of God Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT Manjir Samanta-Laughton's "Punk Science" is worth five stars. I recommend her book because of its groundbreaking insights, and this is despite of the book's significant weaknesses that I will also point out. You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Punk-Science-Inside-MindGod/dp/1905047932/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: punk science, mind of God, insight. Samanta-Laughton (page 13) writes: "The frontiers of science are revealing that the universe behaves as the mystics have told us all along." That I agree with this remarkable observation explains why I am willing to forgive the weaknesses of "Punk Science". Samanta-Laughton tells us that it is consciousness that has been omitted from a scientific world-view that sees the world only as material interactions. She (page 24) writes that, "science has led us full circle: by eliminating all discussion of consciousness, it has found that consciousness is inevitable in our universe and is inherent in all." Consciousness is hard-wired into the fabric of space-time! Samanta-Laughton (page 38) writes: "Not only do reductionist biologists have difficulty explaining the self-organizing nature of the cell, they have also failed to find satisfactory answers to how life first began. This fact is not apparent from the public image of science, which gives the impression that we know how life began and can continue with cloning sheep." And while referring to Bruce Lipton's work and others, she (page 59) writes: "We used to think of ourselves as victims of our inherited genes and the luck of the draw. Now we are realizing that we can learn to manage our beliefs and perceptions and therefore our own biology." Perception has found an essential ingredient in our biology, and it is the perception horizon that connects directly with consciousness (as we will see). Samanta-Laughton (page 64) writes - "Every atom, molecule, bacteria and cell is inherently intelligent. The information deep within every subatomic particle shapes life: form embryos to evolution. It is consciousness itself that undergoes evolution and this is reflected in the increasing complexity of species. The information of the form already exists and what we call physical matter follows suit." Her reference to "form" will be a big point, as the topic will eventually turn to a mirror image aspect of our one universe (the provider of form), a topic that will emerge from physics and take us into cosmology. Samanta-Laughton (page 84) refers to Rupert Sheldrake's "morphic resonance," a conception closely related to form. Samanta-Laughton describes new views of the quantum vacuum (QV), and she treats David Bohm's "holographic universe," and including Karl Pribram's vision of brain function. She (page 109) writes: "Having searched for the exact location of memory in the brain and not found it, does memory exists in the QV?" Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 783 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 782-784 Smith, S. P. Review of Manjir Samanta-Laughton's Book: Punk Science: Inside the Mind of God Samanta-Laughton (page 111) writes: "Most people have had the experience of thinking hard about a problem, putting the problem aside for some time only to find the answer appears suddenly when the mind is focused elsewhere. It is at these moments of least effort that we seem to find the most inspiration and the solution appears. This could be when we are able to access the QV more effectively. All the information we need is present in the QV, yet we need to relax in order to access it more deeply." Samanta-Laughton (chapter 8) reads much into string theory (ST), including superstring theory and M-theory. She goes from "the music of the hyperspace" to "the cosmic symphony". Presumably string theory is needed to reconnect to innate vibrations that are discovered in the physiological studies of Valerie Hunt and Keith Wakelam (chapter 9). Samanta-Laughton notes that ST is incomplete, as no reference is made to consciousness. Nevertheless, it seems that Samanta-Laughton has given to ST an early endorsement (including higher dimensional space), and I don't really see that "Punk Science" depends on ST. Samanta-Laughton (page 141) ask: "If we find that there is a correlation between the behavior of the electromagnetic field and a person's thought and feelings, is this proof that our inherent vibrations, our superstrings, are related to consciousness?" Well, the answer is NO! In my view, ST has not proven itself to be empirical science. Otherwise, Hunt and Wakelam have noted real vibrations that imply a curious gradation in human consciousness. Samanta-Laughton (page 142) writes: "As a person makes progress with their inner development, this is reflected in their inherent frequencies. We exist as frequencies of consciousness that changes as we change our minds." The remainder of "Punk Science" pertains to the "The Black Hole Principle" (BHP); I am of the opinion that this principle should be considered very closely, as it makes good sense. To summarize SamantaLaughton in my words, the BHP says that black holes (points of singularities in our universe and are concealed by a perception horizon) are connected to higher dimensions where infinite light finds itself engaged with both creation and annihilation. I don't think one can point to the "higher dimensions" that are implied by an abstract ST. Rather, higher dimensions signify a transcendental realm, and this is all that can be said in my view. Chapters 12 and 13 are the best chapters in the book, and there is much dependence of William Tiller's work. In short, we have one world with two aspect: there is the c region limited to travel below the speed of light; and there is the c**2 region for higher speeds. The c**2 region is the mirror image of the c region. The c**2 region unfolds in reverse time, it is the feminine aspect of creation. The c region is the masculine aspect of creation. Between the two is the higher dimensional realm where infinite light makes it passage, but I prefer to call this the transcendental. An electron (matter) seen through c-region eyes turns into a positron (anti-matter) when viewed through the eyes of the c**2 region. But as the positron moves backward through time from an open future, the particle is also transformed into a wave-form to bring out the feminine that gives its support to the masculine. Samanta-Laughton provides much new evidence to support here view, coming from cosmology and showing the discovery of light and particle emission from black holes and other celestial bodies. The BHP principle is applied not just to black holes, but to other bodies that are less than black holes: neutron stars; suns, planets, people, electrons. And she takes the BHP and applies it to singularities that are found in our every day understanding of things (e.g., storms), from chapter 14 to the end of the book. I will criticize Samanta-Laughton for painting with too broad of a brush making it look like so many vortex-like spirals are the result of the BHP. I have no doubt that the BHP is active somewhere, but such activity might also provide support for a more conventional vortex that emerges from mere classical dynamics. Smanata-Laughton has changed black holes into agents of creation. She (page 237) writes: "We can modify our black hole picture in the following way. Light travels from infinity and spirals toward our ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 784 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| September 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 6 | pp. 782-784 Smith, S. P. Review of Manjir Samanta-Laughton's Book: Punk Science: Inside the Mind of God perception horizon. As it does, it also reaches the mirror universe in the c**2 region, just out of our perception. Not only can we find aspects of this concept in mainstream science, it also fits actual observation." Smanata-Laughton (page 280) seems to think free choice is an illusion: "The parallel worlds are actually the infinite choices that are presented to our infinite selves. They occur in mathematics, but not in the reality that exists in space and time. Within our reality, our lives are predetermined; there is no parallel `you' making another choice. This also means that the choices we make are always the `right' ones because our infinite selves have already chosen them. " But Smanata-Laughton forgets that for our freewill to be real it only means that our ONE infinite self is free. And if we make the `right' choice, the bad karma will come hunting for us. The feminine aspect provides route-invariance for all our `right' choices, and this is far from determinism. Eventually we make our way to our infinite self that is free of karma. In her last chapter, Smanata-Laughton takes the BHP to George W. Bush, Michael Moore, and the Elliot Wave theory of stock investing. Forgive me if I am unable to see the connection. References David Skrbina, 2006, Punk Science: Inside the Mind of God, O Books. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

584 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness Article A Model of Human Consciousness Robert H. Kettell* Abstract It has been difficult to define human consciousness because of its many differing qualities and because of various views people have of consciousness. It is proposed that these multiple vantage points be united into a single three-dimensional model utilizing breadth, time and depth. This model could provide a more comprehensive definition of consciousness and encourage an exploration of the interplay of consciousness‟ many features. Such a model may also help answer some of the many questions that the concept of consciousness creates. Keywords: quantum, consciousness, epiontic, Buddhism, theory of everything. A Model of Human Consciousness Over the years a variety of proposals have been suggested to clarify our understanding of the nature of a person‟s consciousness. Some proposals have focused on specific aspects our consciousness such as our focus of attention; others have attempted to take a more cosmic view; some people feel that there is no “overarching thing as consciousness” but only its separate parts (Brothers 2008). Many models have tried to illustrate consciousness by utilizing analogies to the structure of the brain; some follow a computer model; others rely on metaphysics. Francis Crick (1994 p. xii) has summarized the issue: “Consciousness is a subject about which there is little consensus, even as to what the problem is.” * Correspondence: Robert H. Kettell. E-mail: robkettell@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 585 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness The model of human consciousness proposed here expands current concepts of consciousness to make them more useful in explaining its operations. This model (Kettell 2009) suggests that the dimensions of breadth, time and depth might encompass more of what we know about consciousness and thus provides a more comprehensive view of the phenomenon. Previous models separate sleep from consciousness, but this model sees sleep as one part of the pattern of consciousness. This model attempts to create an overarching view that accommodates much of what we know about changes in consciousness over time. Some models have created a two-part system that includes a single conscious state and a mysterious unconscious, but this proposed model sees these features as part of a continuum. Some previous models of consciousness have detailed either the dimensions of breadth or time, but none have combined all three dimensions. This proposed model details the dimension of depth unlike other models. The model discussed here can be used to reexamine some of consciousness‟s nagging questions: the mind-body question, qualia, free will, animal and computer consciousness. The model does not address other consciousness questions such as the roles of thinking and cognition in consciousness, the difference between knowledge and information, the relation to “mental states,” nor the source or cause of consciousness. For some people it is important to know the underlying philosophy of an author prior to reading a paper – for these people “Underlying Assumptions Of The Model” is included later in this paper to expose the author‟s prejudices. For the remaining readers, the proposed model assumes that consciousness is not a physical thing, but a useful concept to explain some of the workings of the human brain and body. This model attempts to make the concept more useful. 1. The Three-Dimensional Model Consciousness can be seen as having three-dimensions - not the three-dimensions associated with Cartesian space: height, width and distance - but the dimensions of breadth, time and depth. The dimension of breadth describes consciousness in varying intensities from fully focused on a subject, to somewhat attentive, to daydreaming, to experiencing waking dreams, to creating dreams that are never brought to full awareness, to deep sleep and finally to a coma or anesthetics. Human‟s consciousness plays a continuously changing role that makes the next dimension of consciousness time. Consciousness also comes in various levels that are referred to as the dimension of depth. Most people agree that the humans have at least one layer of cognition beyond our normal state of awareness; some refer to this as our unconscious. However, it is unlikely that the depth of our consciousness is a simple binary system - it is more likely that there is a continuum of layers of consciousness. We will look at each of the threedimensions in more detail. The Dimension Of Breadth: Most people realize that the intensity of their consciousness varies considerably; sometimes we are keenly aware of ourselves, while at other times we are lost in imaginary thoughts. According to Benjamin Pinkel (1992 p. 22): “In the normal course of life one encounters several ordinary states of consciousness in wakefulness, sleep, and dreaming.” The proposed model adds a few gradations to Pinkel‟s simple three-part classification system: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 586 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness  focused: When people are fully concentrating, their attention is narrowed to a limited range of objects or events, and their consciousness can be described as focused. At this breadth of consciousness other objects or events are ignored – they are brought back to attention only when the person‟s focus changes. A student takng the SAT test is hopefully in this focused state of consciousness. At the extreme end of focused awareness is deep mediation. Anthony Newburg (2001 p. 148) has developed a unique term for this: “Absolute Unitary Being is described as a state without time, space, and physical sensations; with no discrete awareness of any material reality at all.”  attentive: When a human is generally aware of his or her surroundings and activities - when a person is simply awake – their consciousness can be described as attentive. Some definitions of consciousness consider only this range of breadth, but such a definition is far too limiting. In our example the student is now walking through the quad and talking about her SAT exam to a friend – she is somewhat attentive to where and how she walks and whom she passes, but is primarily attentive to the conversation she is conducting with her friend.  day dreaming: When humans are only vaguely aware of their environment and primarily imagining other possible surroundings and activities, their consciousness can be described as day dreaming. The same student, who is now lying on the grass in the quad with the warm sun shining on her, is gently absorbing her entire environment utilizing all her senses, but not concentrating on any one of them. She is present in her environment, but not attentive to any particular aspect of it, possibly thinking about shapes in the clouds above.  waking dreams: When a human is emerging from a dream but continues with the dream‟s line of thinking - even though they now realize that it is only a dream - their consciousness can be described as a lucid dream or waking dream. Here they can manipulate the course of the dream. Our student lying on the grass had fallen asleep and begun to dream (see below) about aliens from another planet, but as she gradually awakes she continues to think about aliens hiding behind the clouds above. A variation of this breadth of consciousness would be hallucinations where a person has only partial control over the content of their thinking and only partially realizes their environment.  dreams: When a human is engaged in imaginary settings and activities and is not aware that this imagined environment is not real, their consciousness can be described as dreaming. Our student has fallen asleep and now believes she is on another planet talking with its aliens.  deep sleep: When humans is not visualizing any settings or activities - when they are performing internal regulatory functions, making connections or consolidating the day‟s activities - their consciousness can be described as deep sleep. Our student‟s dreams stop, she no longer has a narrative running, and she has lost all sense of time.  anesthetics and coma: When a human is under the influence of anesthetics, or in a coma, they appear to be only performing internal regulatory functions. Our student is easily awakened from deep sleep, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 587 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness but usually does not become attentive until the effects of anesthetics have worn off, or she recovers from the coma. The exact end of the breadth scale is difficult to determine. Several recent reports on so-called brain dead people have shown that some learning can still take place (Harmon, 2009), people in vegetative states still have periods of sleep and wakefulness (Casert 2009), and some brain activity can take place in completely unresponsive people (Carey 2010). Some of the changes from one breadth category to another can be abrupt (like suddenly waking from sleep), while some of the changes are smooth (such as the transition from focused to attentive). Anthony Freeman (2003 p.78) paraphrases Susan Greenfield in her analogy of the situation: “she regards consciousness not as an on/off switch but more like a dimmer dial for a room light.” One example of the transitions along the dimension of breadth is nicely described by Fred Dretske (2002 p. 426): You have been driving a car alone for a long time daydreaming about other matters when you suddenly realize that you had no conscious memory of the road or other traffic for several miles. Rudolfo Llinas (2002) attributes the transition between sleep and awake to the change in frequency of the brain cycles (or vortex) thus changing the “granularity” of a person‟s awareness of the world. According to Llinas a continuous low-level cycle of brain activity accounts for fact that people remember who and where they are upon awaking from sleep. Susan Greenfield (2005 p. 3) indicates that a person‟s breadth of consciousness is “correlated with different sizes of neuronal assembly” at the time – the larger the assembly of neurons, the greater the breadth of consciousness. From a neurological view the dream state of consciousness is often called rapid eye movement (REM) sleep “and bears a marked similarity to that of waking,” while in deep (or non-REM) sleep “most neurons show decreased firing.” However, even deep sleep is not uniform – it can have an “intense burst firing” that are attributed to the consolidation of unstable memory traces and the transfer of information to long-term storage - thus influencing “the cognitive capacities of subsequent waking” (Hobson 2002 p.688). In fact, “sleep - in all its phases – does something to improve memory that being awake does not do” (Strickgold 2008). The Dimension Of Time: According to Rudolfo Llinas (2002 p. 120) time is the basic element that creates consciousness in humans: “Timeness is consciousness.” In his view the brain‟s neurons are linked to an “internal clock” which acts as the connecting mechanism needed for consciousness. However, he is thinking only on the quickest time scale of consciousness – in terms of 40 vibrations per second. Dan Lloyd (2007 p. 330) also notes the importance of time in understanding consciousness: “Time, I‟ll suggest, is the fundamental structure of our experience (and essential to every aspect of cognition). It is so basic as to be invisible and thus largely overlooked in both philosophy and cognitive science” In this proposed model time changes a person‟s consciousness along several scales:  microseconds: On the quickest time scale, the range of microseconds, some events occur so quickly that a person is not aware of them, or becomes aware only after they have already responded to the event. For example, visual stimulus that appears for less than 100 microseconds seldom reaches a person‟s level of awareness, but yet when asked about the image the person can often give an accurate ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 588 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness description (Fernandez-Duque 2009). Many of us are familiar with putting our hand on something hot, but realizing it was hot only after we have already pulled our hand from the object – we responded before we were aware of the event.  seconds: On a slightly longer time scale, the range of seconds, consciousness is continually changing its focus from one object or thought to another. While this appears to be a uniform flow, this scale of consciousness can be compressed or expanded slightly. “During [non-REM] sleep, firing patterns are replayed on a condensed timescale, whereas during REM sleep, the timescale of the replay...is similar to that of the original waking experience” (Hobson 2002 p. 690).  days: On an intermediate time scale, the range of a day, consciousness changes on a regular pattern for most people. The flow from one breadth of consciousness to another happens on a daily basis as people sleep, dream, wake, focus their efforts and eventually return to sleep.  years: On the longest time scale, the range of years, humans grow from embryo to child to adult and the nature of their consciousness changes considerably. Up to a certain age consciousness‟ scope expands, its contents are more refined and its processing becomes more complex. Helena Gao (2008 p. 4) has identified six stages of consciousness in childhood: (1) inherited or “wired in” cognitive abilities, such as imitating gestures, distinguishing objects and actions and basic learning procedures, (2) minimal consciousness, such as repeating sounds, (3) stimulus-response or “conditioned” consciousness, such as labeling from semantic memory, (4) simple recursive consciousness where one uses utterances to cause others to act, as when an object like a bottle is present, (5) extended recursive consciousness causing other to act when an object is not present, and (6) self-consciousness where one can characterize the mental activities of others, look ahead to possible alternative courses of action, and plan sequences of actions. “At about the age of five, it is claimed, children begin to see others as conscious beings” (Noe 2009 p. 29). At the far end of this time scale, old age sometimes changes people‟s experience of consciousness and it can appear to be muted or slowed. The Dimension Of Depth: Most people realize that a person‟s normal waking consciousness does not explain all of our behavior - even by extending the dimensions of breadth and time we cannot fill all of the explanatory gaps. We need to look for other layers; we need to look at consciousness in greater depth. While the basic awareness range of consciousness has some common understanding, there is little agreement when the characteristics of depth are discussed. A review of the literature shows that the existing models have very little in common with each other when this dimension of consciousness is described (Morin 2004 p. 1). The most basic example of the depth of consciousness is our ability to regulate most of our bodily functions without being aware of the effort. Andrew Newberg (2001 p. 38-39) notes: With the input of various brain structures, the autonomic nervous systems are responsible for regulating fundamental functions such as heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature, and digestion. At the same time, because of its connections to higher brain structures, it also has a significant relationship with many other aspects of brain activity, including the generation of emotions and mood. The autonomic system is composed of two branches: the sympathetic and the parasympathetic nervous systems...There is evidence, however, of cases in which both ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 589 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness systems function at the same time when pushed to maximal levels of activity and this has been associated with extraordinary alternative states of consciousness. Daniel Reisberg (2006 p. 519) notes that through experiments with “blind sight” and amnesia, deeper levels of consciousness can receive, process and store sensory information that the levels of awareness cannot. He calls this depth of consciousness “memory without awareness.” At another level, Reisberg (2006 p. 512-17) uses the term “cognitive unconscious” when our lack of awareness does more than process information - at this level it is a support system for our awareness. When it acts in this supporting capacity it is responsible for remembering and categorizing. It contains our set of “unnoticed assumptions and definitions” needed for decision-making and framing a question. His “cognitive unconscious” establishes a “perceptual reference frame” that “determines the understanding of the conscious image, how the image subjectively appears, and what the image will call to mind.” It is this level of consciousness that sets the context for our ideas, influences our priming, and “shapes both the content and sequence of our thoughts.” Another level of consciousness can actively and directly processes mental activities – it does some of our thinking. Reisberg (2006 p. 513-14) notes: “[T]hat our unconscious thinking can be rather sophisticated, with layers of inference and reasoning.” In describing the conclusions of a placebo experiment he says: Note also the complexity of the unconscious thinking in this experiment. The participants are reasoning about themselves in an intellectually sophisticated manner: observing „symptoms,‟ generating hypotheses about those symptoms, drawing conclusions, and so on. David Rosenthal (1990) uses the term “order” to describe the depths of a person‟s consciousness: “[C]onscious states must be accompanied by suitable higher-order thoughts, and unconscious mental states cannot be thus accompanied.” “Order” is the same term that Daniel Dennett (1991 p. 16) also uses: “The second-order thought does not itself have to be conscious in order for its first-order object to be conscious...some second-order thoughts are conscious - by virtue of third-order thoughts about them these are relatively rare.” Philip Clayton (2004 p. 143) sees three “levels” of consciousness - “base,” “second” and “reflective:” Biological systems are already „end-governed propensities to perform certain behaviors,‟ either learned or genetically based. On this base-level system is built a second-level motivational system, which is composed of „beliefs and desires about actions to be performed‟. The motivational and habitual systems are in turn influenced by a reflective level involving higher-order cognitive processes. Patricia Smith Churchland (2002 p. 105 & p. 90) describes the depths of our cognition in terms of “networks:” Roughly speaking, inner regulation is essentially low-level cognition with a narrow plasticity range: high-level cognition is essentially fancy regulation, with a much broader plasticity range...These high-level networks embody one‟s long-term plans, as well as one‟s preferences, skills, attitudes, and temperament. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 590 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness This proposed model of consciousness details is a continuum of depths. Even though names can sometimes be misleading, the model has created labels for five points along the scale:  physical feelings: When our consciousness is handling information about our body and its surrounds, we are operating at a basic physical level. Here we are monitoring and measuring electro-chemical information from our internal organs and are creating basic feelings or associations about our environment and ourselves. An often used example of this depth of consciousness would be the fear created when our ancient ancestors suddenly felt the presence of a lion in the bushes.  subconsciousness: When our consciousness is evaluating information from physical feelings it is called subconsciousness. Information about bodily functions is compared to desired levels and necessary adjustments are made to compensate for changes. Information about the external environment is processed for importance. Critical information from this level is forwarded to the next level in the depth of consciousness. As the subconscious processes the basic feeling of fear of a lion it will prepare or package the feeling in the form of “fight or flight.” At this level of consciousness we develop habits based on similar situations from the past. Many of these reactions become automatic responses to the environment and the body. This level might include what Daniel Reisberg (2006 p. 514-20) refers to as the “supporting and thinking” functions, the separate, self-contained well-defined “processing modules” that are relatively specialized. Subconsciousness may be what David Rosenthal (2002) calls “sensory states.” This level is where Hans Phaf (1997) notes: “Nonconscious processes are activated by sensory or quasi-sensory input, but conscious experience is constructed in working memory by combining sequences of activated representations.”  awareness: When our consciousness is functioning at this level (which might also be called attention) we turn subconsciousness into cognitive experiences that become the center of our thoughts. The feelings and emotions that were attached to experiences in the subconscious level are not usually lost, but neither are they always fully realized. At this depth of consciousness our human ancestors would focus their attention on the lion, attempt to determine its intentions and evaluate alternative actions. At the depth of awareness we are continually changing our focus over short periods of time (often in the time scale of seconds) - this constantly variable feature is probably not present in the other depths of consciousness. Anthony Freeman (2003 p. 56) notes: “[A]ttention holds the key to which cognitive brain processes become conscious and which remain „in the dark.‟” Awareness creates memories of our experiences, and miraculously allows us to continue projecting these experiences into the future, and then to imagine experiences we has never encountered. At this level of operation, we can compare past experiences with projected future experiences, see the resulting differences, and match the differences with desired results.  superconsciousness: When our consciousness is operating at this level we evaluate the desirability of different results to a specific situation. Our human ancestor is judging the worth of protecting his own life verses the lives of his family that are directly behind him. Here we create purposeful behavior in response to goals, values and visions established by subliminal feelings (see below). Here we can stop automatic subconscious behaviors and substitute behaviors that we desire. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 591 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness This level of consciousness might be what others refer to as setting the “framework for perception” (generating hypotheses and drawing conclusions) or generating “third-order” thoughts. This is the level that might be described as “meta-cognition” by Alain Morin (2004 p. 13). Superconsciousness may be what David Rosenthal (2002) calls “intentional states.” It may be one of our major sources of new ideas: “As regards superconsciousness (creative intuition), it probably belongs exclusively to the ideal needs of the cognition and transformation of the surrounding world” (Simonov 1994 p. 236). The thinking processes we use at the superconsciousness level are probably different from the thinking processes we use at the awareness level - rephrasing Hans Phaf (1997) one might say awareness (i.e. symbol manipulation) is sequential, whereas superconsciousness is predominantly parallel.  subliminal feelings: When we are creating feelings or associations about beliefs, morals, ethical judgments, truth, wisdom, beauty and love our consciousness is operating at the subliminal level. Subliminal feelings help us establish the goals, values and visions that the superconsciousness uses to evaluate actions. Our ancient ancestor could not express it, but he unwittingly knows that he as some responsibility for others that are close to him. Daniel Dennett (1991 p. 370) may be describing this subliminal feelings level of consciousness when he uses the term “ground of consciousness”: [I]t is widely accepted (in Yoga, Vedanta, Buddhism, Taoism, etc.) that the surface phenomena of consciousness emerge from deeper structures of consciousness which can be experienced directly, and that these deeper structures in turn emerge from an underlying „ground‟ of consciousness which is also experienceable. Andrew Newberg (2001, p. 34) may be describing subliminal feelings when he talks about altered states of consciousness: The second characteristic, which was hinted at in our SPECT scan studies, is the ability of the mind to interpret spiritual experience as real. This ability, based on the mind‟s capacity to enter altered states of consciousness, and to adjust its assessment of reality neurologically, is a fundamental link between biology and religion. A few examples of transitions from different depths of awareness may be helpful: (1) You have been writing a paper on consciousness and vaguely feeling uncomfortable, then suddenly you realize what the problem is - you have headache that had previously not been recognized. This would be a transition from subconsciousness to awareness. (2) You are in a strange new social setting that somehow doesn‟t seem right, but you haven‟t expressed this feeling to yourself. When you decide to leave to this bad party you are making a transition from superconscious to awareness. Transitions between different depths of consciousness also run the other direction: (A) Much of our attentive behavior becomes routine and automatic so that it no longer requires our direct attention. 1 For example, while it may have taken focused attention when you first learned to ride a bicycle, you can now perform this activity almost entirely at the subconsciousness level. (B) When a person continually makes 1 This is sometimes referred to as expert knowledge. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 592 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness moral decisions at the awareness level over an extended period of time, this pattern becomes part of the person‟s personality and it moves to his superconscious. These examples imply some depths of consciousness transitions lie just outside of the range of awareness, but there are probably transitions from feelings to subconsciousness and superconsciousness that we do not recognize. There is probably a continuum of layers of consciousness involved. John Searle (1992 p. 166) expresses this as: “Sometimes there may be several inferential steps between the latent unconscious mental state and the manifest conscious intentionality.” In the depth of consciousness it appears that subconsciousness and superconsciousness are always operating in the background, while in the breadth of consciousness a change from one level replaces another sequentially. It appears that subconsciousness processes basic physical feelings and superconsciousness processes subliminal feelings is such a way to organizes them into something that can be thought about, something that can be conceived and expressed. These levels filter, categorize and package the feelings and associations that eventually reach the level of awareness. As feelings are brought from the subconsciousness and superconsciousness their nature may change. Sim Liddon (1989 p. 162) sees that the unconscious “reflects emotion, intention, significance, meaning, and value within subjective experience. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 593 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness In short it has life.” However when these images reach awareness they become more linear and analytical. Here Liddon quotes William James as saying “for it is one of the peculiarities of invasions from the subconscious region to take on objective appearances.” Not all feelings are turned to thoughts that enter to the depth of awareness, if fact, it may be only the unusual that reaches the level of awareness: Processing of information is assumed to be unconscious and automatic at all levels, unless we attend to a particular at which processing is taking place. If this is an accurate picture of what is going on in the brain the mechanism of attention – that is, the mechanism that leads to consciousness – should be thought of as a kind of interruption in other processing, rather than a separate cognitive process in its own right (Freeman 2003 p. 141). It appears that of the various depths of consciousness, awareness is not necessarily the most powerful level: [O]ur nonconscious information processing system is comparably more capable to process formally complex knowledge structures, faster, and „smarter‟ overall than our ability to think and identify meanings of stimuli in a consciously [awareness] controlled manner (Lewicki 1995 p. 8). Awareness is not necessarily our most creative either. Frederic Myers thought that genius is “a state in which the waking self is in continuous vital relationship with the subliminal self” (Grosso 2010 p. 2). 2. The Mind-Body Question In The Model Since Rene Descartes many people have believed that humans have, in addition to their bodies, a separate mind that thinks and understands, but does not “extend into space,” i.e. a mind that is immaterial or hidden from the physical world. But how can a hidden mind influence a material body? If the human body works by the principles of the physical science what role is there for any other nonphysical influence? How could something like a mind ever “talk” to a person? The traditional mind-body question created two worlds separated by such a large philosophical divide that it was impossible to connect the two. In this traditional view there is either just one physical world or there are two worlds, one visible and one hidden – yet they somehow mysteriously communicate with each other only through humans. This lead to the corollary that consciousness was either a strictly a function of the physical brain or it had a mysterious capability to interact with both the visible and hidden worlds. While Descartes did not have the advantage of our current knowledge of the operation of the human brain, the questions raised have not changed much since his model. Descartes (1641 p. 19) realized this would remain a question: “[T]he nature of man as a combination of mind and body is such that it is bound to mislead him from time to time.” However, if consciousness is viewed from this proposed three-dimensional model, answers to some of these questions are within sight and the gap between the mind and the body may be somewhat reduced. In the three-dimensional model the depth of consciousness is a continuum that begins with basic physical feelings about the human‟s internal operations (digestion, pain, etc.) and the body‟s senses (sight, smell, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 594 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness etc.). Physical feelings are translated into something that can be organized and prioritized in the subconscious. Another level, awareness, is generated by subconscious thoughts and superconscious thoughts. The level of consciousness referred to as the superconsciousness serves the same role for subliminal feelings that the subconscious does for physical feelings – it organizes and prioritizes unthought emotions for expression in the level of awareness. Another level of consciousness, subliminal feelings, is the starting point for this chapter. What is the nature of these subliminal feelings? Where do these feelings come from? How do they enter the physical body and brain? Examples Of Subliminal Feelings The three-dimensional model of consciousness sees subliminal feelings as creating unspoken desires for goals, values and visions for a person‟s life. These feelings are one of the distinguishing characteristics of people – features that separate humans from other animals. There are many aspects of the consciousness that could qualify as such a distinguishing characteristic, but three will be mentioned:  truth: Humans have a deep need to solve mysteries and discover truth – a feeling that appears to be unique among earth‟s species. Many mammals benefit from encounters with their environment, however when these animals “learn” from their fellows or their surrounds they are discovering the “when, where and who” of events. Humans are different from other animals in that they also seek to discover the “why” – the reasons, causes and purposes of events. This feeling for a need to answer questions and desire to continually search the unknown puts humans several steps beyond other animals in the evolutionary process. It appears that something has been added to their evolution of consciousness. Elizabeth Johnson (2008 p. 33) paraphrases Karl Rahner when answering the question: where does this desire come from? “It can only be that the human spirit is characterized by an unrestricted drive toward the truth, which is ultimately boundless.”  beauty: Humans have a deep need to create and enjoy beauty. This is different from simply seeking a friendly environment as single cell organisms do. This is different from simply seeking comfort, as some mammals seem to do. Only humans seek beauty in terms of finding unification in contrasts, creating organization in chaos and appreciating harmonious relations and rhythms.  goodness: Humans have a deep need to strive for good works and actions. While some colonies of insects and some groups of mammals may appear to work for the greater good of their “organization,” these actions are different from a general concept of doing good in general. Humans seem to be the only species that works to help unrelated individuals who are not necessary for the survival of their society – they seem to want justice for everybody, and often for other species. This characteristic does not seem to be something that would have naturally arisen in a world of survival of the fittest. In another view, P V Simonov (1994 p. 237) seems to be describing "the three principal „languages‟ of superconsciousness: the sense of beauty, the sense of humor, and the so-called „voice of conscience‟.” William Grassie (2010 p. 23) lists the “noble qualities in humanity, including creativity, purpose, perseverance, gratitude, prayer, awe, responsibility, love, honesty, joy, humility, and generosity.” ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 595 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness Traditional Sources Of Subliminal Feelings If human‟s desires for truth, beauty and goodness do not come from natural evolutionary process, where did they come from? Human‟s physical feelings have their origin in the body‟s senses and internal body functions, but what is the source of human‟s subliminal feelings? For the answer to this question it would be helpful to first review suggestions for the answer to the related question - the mind-body question. The mind-body question is: how can the hidden influence the visible? This question will be reframed into a subliminal feelings question. Without a comprehensive definition of consciousness people have attempted to solve the mind-body question in several ways – none of them completely satisfactorily. If these same people were to try to solve the question of the source of subliminal feelings they might answer as follows:  option 1 - unusual evolution: Some might say that subliminal feelings have evolved naturally like all other brain and body functions; we simply have not yet found the mechanism for this stage of evolution. It may be possible that somehow in the random changes in genes over time one change produced a brain that felt the need for truth, beauty and goodness – characteristics that in themselves do not necessarily contribute towards an organism‟s survival. This evolved type of brain with its subliminal feelings may not have contributed to human evolutionary survival, but the body that contained this brain with these random changes may have had other survival capabilities that enabled the whole body to adapt to its environment and prosper. Peter Carruthers (2000) speculates on another evolutionary possibility: “To the extent that a faculty of inner sense exhibits complex internal organization subserving a unitary or systematically organized causal role, to that extent it will be plausible to postulate evolutionary selection.” In this view subliminal feelings come naturally from the way our brain and body has evolved.  option 2 – emergence: Some might say that subliminal feelings have emerged as a new complex functioning of the brain that grew out of simpler the operations of the brain. These new emerged capabilities are compatible with what we know about neuroscience, but operate beyond what can be predicted by only neuroscience. There are two variations of this view. option 2a - bottom-up emergence: The determinants of an object‟s nature depend upon the scale of observation and the object‟s environment. For example, the small atomic-scale properties of H2O are useful when talking about water‟s spectrometric image, but this scale of observation in is not sufficient when describing the large collective-scale properties of water needed to describe H2O in the form of steam. In other words, we need to look at a different set of characteristics at different levels of explanation. Similarly, in the brain the electrochemical properties of a single neuron are appropriate for one scale of explanation, but its large-scale assemblies or networks best describe the brain‟s informational processing properties. Based on these scale-based properties it is possible that the emergence of higher-level brain functions is consistent with and exclusively determined by basic lower-level brain processes - it is just that we are unable to explain the brains higher processes with our current knowledge of the basic neural systems. Therefore many of the properties of consciousness only appear to “emerge” from more basic forms of brain functions. In this view the expanded brain functioning is a bottom-up type of emergence that can happen ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 596 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness without any “outside” help. In this view subliminal feelings come from naturally occurring, but advanced brain processes that we will eventually understand. or option 2b - top-down emergence: From a top-down emergence perspective new characteristics of a system may be consistent with its component parts, but the individual parts do not fully determine the operations of the whole system. Here the full operation of a system can only be found in an understanding from some higher perspective or environment – often seen as the system‟s role or function or purpose. From this point of view there appears to be influences from “above” that create a “downward action” so that the higher functions of a system influence the behavior of the system‟s constituent parts. For example “The emotion of fear, for example, stimulates the release of adrenaline into the bloodstream, which in turn influences the dynamics of neural behavior: a clear example of the downward action” (Scott 2001 p. 165). In this view of emergence our capacity for subliminal feelings comes from some new capability that has arisen from beyond the lower-level physical properties of the brain and body; some new capacity that has not yet been explained by science.  option 3 – protopsychism: Some might say that subliminal feelings arise from a combination of some unknown element that physical things possess - we just have not yet found this basic pre-conscious property. Again, there are two possibilities: option 3a - universal protopsychism: Some might say that all material things have this proto-conscious element and as the complexity of things increases this property becomes more apparent. Thus while electrons have protopsychism characteristics their actions are too simple to reveal it. However in something as complicated as a human these basic elements of consciousness combine and their impact can se seen. David Chalmers (1996 p. 307) calls this panpsychism and he suggests how these unknown elements combine: “[I]t might be that microphenomenal properties add up to macrophenomenaology in a way that reflects their joint informational structure, rather than their joint spatiotemporal structure.” In this view subliminal feelings might come from fragments of consciousness that have been combined into a complex structure in humans. or option 3b - living protopsychism: Some might say that preconscious properties have only arisen with the evolution of life – inanimate objects do not have them. In this view there is something special that arrives with life – something more than the ability to reproduce and evolve. As life-forms become more advanced these basic proto-conscious elements also advance and combine until with the complexity of humans real consciousness becomes apparent. In this view human‟s subliminal feelings come from the combining and organizing of the small basic elements of consciousness that all living creatures have. John Eccles (1994 p. 111) calls elementary mental events “psychons” and speculates that they may be organized “forming a psychic entity apart from the brain” – called the mind.  option 4 – spirits: Some might say that subliminal feelings come from yet-to-be-discovered personalities that are hidden from the visible world but are accessible by humans. These personalities may be some unknown immaterial entity or physical entities that are simply hidden from us in the same way that dark matter cannot be seen. “Scientists are increasingly considering the possibility that dark matter is…a hidden side of the universe with a rich inner life. It may consist of a veritable zoo of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 597 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness particles interacting through novel forces of nature – an entire universe interwoven silently within our own” (Feng 2010 p. 40). Again there are two possibilities: option 4a – souls: In this view humans have a hidden force that is the source of their subliminal feelings and this extra something has been “given” to humans by some powerful, but hidden personality.2 There are differing opinions whether this “gift” comes at a human‟s conception or at some later point in life. Often this view says that the extra something has a continued existence beyond the life of the human that possesses it – it lives in a hidden world after death. This personal “gift” may be created new for each person, or it may be recycled among people in different ages.3 In this view subliminal feelings come from something that Michael Scanlon (2008) calls our personal “indwelling spirit.” or option 4b – heaven: Some might say that there is a whole hidden universe that exists in parallel with the material universe that we know. This universe contains not only the personal forces that are “given” to humans, but also a wide variety of other hidden personalities. Humans (but probably no other species) have the capability to tap into this invisible universe. Colin McGinn (2004 p. 141) speculates that the human brain acts “like a kind of inter-universe radio receiver tuned in to the conscious events and processes already occupying” this universe. Thus in this view human‟s subliminal feelings come from personalities outside of the visible universe. Two of these suggestions, unusual evolution (option 1) and bottom-up emergence (option 2a), comply with the strict demands of those materialists who do not see anything other than the physical world. The other views create a need for something else – they go beyond the visible universe we know. Some might criticize the suggestion that there are things that go beyond physical universe because these “extra somethings” are not needed to answer the question of the origin of subliminal feelings.4 Others would answer these critics by noting that the purely physical options have shortcomings and do not fully explain the source of our subliminal feelings - they might also point out that in the evolution of science we have found that reality is usually more complicated than we originally imagined. A century ago who would have guessed that the simple atom is composed of a whole zoo of subatomic particles? Therefore, this model of consciousness does not limit itself to only the material options. Another Source Of Subliminal Feelings Conscious processes are affected by a variety of influences of which we are completely unaware. We only know those few events that break through the subconscious and superconscious into the depth of awareness. Most of the functioning of our consciousness is hidden from us. This model of consciousness allows for speculations that might fill in some of these blanks.  external source of subliminal feelings: In the subliminal feelings level of operation, we have strong feelings for searching for truth, creating beauty and striving for goodness – characteristics that appear to come from beyond the normal capabilities of our body and brain. In processing these feelings the brain is utilizing multiple neural assemblies and networks – its operations involve more than a few 2 This hidden being might be what many people refer to as God. This may be what people refer to as Reincarnation. 4 This criticism is sometimes referred to as Occam‟s Razor. 3 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 598 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness million neurons. Here the brain‟s functions are sensitive to influences that span the entire contents of the brain and body – it no longer relies simply on input from senses and internal organs. It may be possible that the brain is receiving information from beyond the body. According to Alva Noe (2009 p. 49): “the skull is not a magical membrane; why not take seriously the possibility that the causal processes that matter for consciousness are themselves boundary crossing.” Subliminal feelings may be exchanging information both internally and externally.  communicating with the external: You might ask: How do subliminal feelings exchange information with an external source? Can we communicate by means other than our physical senses and internal organs? There are at least two possibilities – one based on physical methods of communication and one based on immaterial communication. Physical communication with an external source may be possible with electronic fields. Since 1967 we have known that when assemblies of neurons in the brain work together they can produce very small electrical fields which can be detected at the human scalp using electroencephalography or EEG (D'Zmura 2010 p. 1). Recently we are starting to learn what some of these signals mean. Some researchers are using these weak signals, enhanced by a computer, to allow totally paralyzed people to communicate (Winters, 2003); some researchers are using the emotions captured by EEG (such as excitement, boredom and frustration) to create computer games (Breen 2008); the Army is researching the possibility of using EEG signals so soldiers can use “communication that‟s silent, secure and free of background noise” (Miles 2008). According to Chris James (2009) “New research from the University of Southampton has demonstrated that it is possible for communication from person to person through the power of thought alone.” So subliminal feelings could come from something that produces the right type of electronic field. Immaterial communication with an external source might be possible with something called quantum communications. Since the 1930s we have known that information can be exchanged at a distance without any apparent physical connection. For example, two entangled photons that have been spatially separated can somehow learn the state of their partner. This information seems to be communicated between the two photons faster than the speed of light, so the transferring media could not be anything physical. One could describe this process of transmitting information as immaterial. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2006) describes how Alice and Bob each have a photon that is in an entangled state of polarization with each other: What is extraordinary about this phenomenon is that Alice and Bob have managed to use their shared entangled state as a quantum communication channel. In earlier experiments the entangled objects exchanging information were at the atomic scale, even though the distances between the objects exceeded the size of the human brain and body. Initially this immaterial communication was thought to be simple - knowledge of polarization, spin, momentum or location - but there is no philosophical reason to exclude more sophisticated information. According to our initial theories of quantum entanglement four conditions would need to be met for immaterial communications: 1) the objects must have some kind of relationship before hand, 2) the objects would need to remain isolated from other objects which would break the entanglement, 3) there would have to be additional means of interpreting the results of the communication, and 4) there ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 599 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness would have to be a means of manipulating the object for it send a communication 5. Originally it seemed impossible to imagine how the human brain could possibly meet these four conditions. However recently Mohan Sarovar (2009 p. 25) found that entanglement plays a role in much larger and warmer systems, such as plant photosynthesis. He concluded: This opens the door to the possibility that entanglement could play a role in, or be a resource for, biological systems. If biological systems can immaterially exchange information, or if something that can create the right type of electronic field near the brain, several questions arise. Might it be possible for the neuronal assemblies in the brain to exchange information using these techniques? Are there limits on the content of this information? What is the nature of the information exchanged? The role of information in the operation of the brain is still a young area of study: [W]e do not yet really understand what the notion of information should mean in a biological or psychological context. Moreover, we do not yet fully understand how neurons code information, whatever information is. (Churchland 2002 p. 170) However, in the three-dimensional model of consciousness it is possible that information is exchanged to help humans create goals, values and visions for their life. This information, in the form of subliminal feelings, may be helping to create hidden desires for truth, beauty and goodness.  source of information: Regardless of how subliminal feelings arrive, the question becomes: Where is the information coming from? Who are we “talking” to? Here possible answers become more speculative. Could communication take place between material objects, like neuronal networks, or hidden personalities, if there are such things? If any of the hidden options proposed by others (options 3 or 4 above) are true, subliminal feelings could be transmitted from them. Is the conversation with other material objects that possess proto-consciousness (option 3a above), or with living things that have developed complex combinations of proto-conscious (option 3b above)? If the communication is tied to physical objects, are there limits to the distance that such a conversation can carry? If the source of external information is independent of visible things (as in option 4a above), does a person‟s subliminal feelings communicate with his or her own indwelling spirit? If so, can communication also take place with another persons‟ indwelling spirit? Are people‟s indwelling spirits uniquely individual, or are they part of some sort of universal unconscious6? If hidden universes exist (as in option 4b above) several questions arise. What kind of invisible things or beings are there? Can a person communicate with all, or only some, of these hidden beings? If they exist, what do they do? 7 The Mind-Body Question Rene Descartes‟ mind-body question can be divided into three components: How could the immaterial communicate with a physical person? How could the hidden or spiritual have an influence upon a person‟s physical behavior? Are there, in fact, invisible personalities that communicate to us? The threedimensional model of consciousness provides for an opportunity for answering two of these three questions. 5 www.hardsf.org/hsftenta.htm For example C G Jung‟s “Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious” Princeton University Press 1969 7 For one possible answer to these questions see The Urantia Book, Chicago, 1955. 6 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 600 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness  immaterial communication: The three-dimensional model allows for subliminal feelings to enter people through either immaterial or material communications - so the immaterial might be able to communicate with humans. [S]o it is logically conceivable that if there be higher spiritual agencies that can directly touch us, the psychological condition of their doing so might be our possession of a subconscious region which alone should yield access to them. The hubbub of the waking life might close a door which in the dreamy subliminal might remain ajar or open (William James 1901 p. 242). However it has not yet been demonstrated that large neuronal networks can use immaterial communication, nor how a hidden entity can influence an electronic field.  immaterial interaction: The three-dimensional model has a place for subliminal feelings, that when filtered through the superconscious, can enter a person‟s awareness and be used to guide actions and behaviors - so there is room for the immaterial to work with the physical person.  immaterial influences: The model of consciousness does not predict anything about the existence of hidden influences – whether they are some new top-down emergence system, an entity that emerges from universal or living protopsychism, a personalized indwelling spirit, or a parallel multipersonality universe. If there are no hidden beings, then the model allows for subliminal feeling to come from within a person – either because humans have had an unusual evolutionary path, or by a bottom-up emergence of capabilities which generate unspoken desires for such things as truth, beauty and goodness. So whatever the answer to the mind-body question, the proposed model allows the answer to be incorporated into the enlarged concept of consciousness. 3. Other Consciousness Questions In The Model The question of how the hidden might “talk” to the visible is but one of several questions raised by the concept of consciousness. Many have questioned how our material body can produce ineffable subjective experiences, or “qualia.” If we live in a physical materialist world, can consciousness explain free will? What role does language play in developing consciousness? This model of consciousness appears to be appropriate for humans, but can it also be applied to animals like dogs that seem to react their owner‟s physical feelings, or to elephants that seem to recognize themselves in a mirror? If “higher animals” have consciousness, why not “lower animals,” or all living things? Can we use this model of consciousness for machines or robots?  qualia and the hard question: Some question how a material brain can produce ineffable subjective feelings like the “experience” of the color red - as opposed to seeing, processing and analyzing the red light. Others suggest that subjective feelings, or qualia, do not exist at all, or as Daniel Dennett (2006, p. 86) puts it: “[P]hilosophers actually don‟t know what they are talking about when they talk about their qualia.” ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 601 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness Some people, like David Chalmers (2000 p. 11) find it difficult to explain how we can create subjective emotions or feelings to our experiences; he calls this the “hard problem.” He asks: “Why should physical processing give rise to a rich inner life at all?” Others like Philip Clayton (2004 p. 121-122), say that subjective experiences can be explained through emerging features of the brain as it processes increasingly more complex information. This proposed model relies heavily on ineffable subjective feelings – they lie at both ends of the depth dimension in our physical feelings and our subliminal feelings. Occasionally they come to our level of awareness. But how can either the physical or the subliminal create such qualitative states? The proposed model projects subjective feelings as being real things; not some new type of substance; not just a useful concept. They are part of the normal processing of the body and brain; they are patterns of electrical/chemical processes in our neurons. Patterns can be real things (Dennett 2008 p. 189205). We may eventually, with more advanced technologies, be able to distinguish those patterns called feelings from the other regulatory and maintenance neuronal patterns. This model sees subjective feelings as the entry point to the depth spectrum of consciousness – the beginning of a process that may, or may not, lead to awareness. Those ineffable subjective feelings that do reach the level of awareness can be called qualia. The emotions that the model calls physical feelings arise from the body‟s senses or the monitoring the body‟s functions. The origin of the emotions that the model calls subliminal feelings is less clear. As outlined in the discussion of the mind-body question above, subliminal feelings may also arise from physical origins because of human‟s unusual evolution or because of a bottom-up type of emerging capability. On the other hand subliminal feelings may have their origin in nonphysical causes such as top-down emergence, protopsychism or spirits.  free will: In this model free will is not a physical thing; it is a useful concept that helps explain some of the functioning of our body and brain. Free will is one of many ways to describe the interplay of activities occurring in the breadth of consciousness called awareness. If the thoughts that enter our awareness come from the subconscious and superconscious, what role is there for the process called awareness? Can awareness change any of the activities or behavior patterns that are fed to it? If it can, how does it do it, and when does it do this? If awareness does not change any of our activities or behavior, why does it appear that it can? At one extreme of this discussion, it should be noted that awareness does not “control” some things even if they are in our most focused attention. “[C]onsider a baseball player „deciding‟ to tip his bat just up or just down as the pitch crossed the plate, which cannot possibly (because of processing speed considerations) be a personal decision in the sense of involving his deliberative consciousness” (Ross 2007 p. 4). At another extreme of this discussion, it should be noted that most human actions and behavior seem to be “controlled” by the subconscious and superconscious. Thankfully very few decisions reach the breadth of consciousness called awareness; otherwise we would be too preoccupied with routine decisions to accomplish anything. For example, as Wayne Christensen (2007 p. 273) notes: “upon hearing a sudden loud noise behind us in a dark alley” we automatically adjust our “fight or flee” muscles, increase our heart rate, raise our blood pressure, sweat and dilate our pupils in a coordinated ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 602 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness fashion. We make all of these decisions without any of them reaching our level of awareness – even though we are keenly aware of hearing the sudden loud noise. In both of these examples there does not appear to be any free will. So can awareness control any of our activities or behavior? In the proposed model the short answer is yes - sort of. The processes that occur in our level of awareness place different values on input from various sources at different times. Sometimes the controlling influence might be our plans and goals; at other times the most important aspect of our awareness will focus on social pressures or psychological needs; our body‟s physical limitations and the desire to avoid pain may be the dominate factor in controlling some actions; feelings for creating beauty or doing good works will occasionally control our behavior; in some situations the dominate input can come from either from our subconscious and superconscious. The fact that controlling factors change gives us our feeling of free will. Or as Wayne Christensen (2007 p. 282) says: “Thus action performed „at will‟ is determined episodically in relation to a constellation of factors, and so can exhibit high levels of spontaneity and variability.” When do these spontaneous and variable factors kick-in and when do our “normal” processes apply? The proposed model offers no short answer. Anthony Freeman (2003 p. 56) says: “[A]ttention holds the key to which cognitive brain processes become conscious and which remain „in the dark.‟” The subconscious and superconscious process subjective feelings and feed them to awareness as thoughts – often sort of “speaking to ourselves.” With each of these thoughts comes its underlying subjective feeling. The attached feelings may be consciously ignored so we can focus on the thought itself, however these attached feelings play an important role in determining how the thoughts are processed. Some of the feelings associated with our thoughts provoke little response and demand no action. If desired we can usually call up the underlying feeling – as when someone asks you how you feel about a situation to which you have given little thought. Some of the thoughts that enter our awareness come with strong feelings, or occasionally the thoughts themselves generate a strong feeling. In some cases the feeling is an uncomfortable one or one that suggests a decision is needed or action should be taken. When the strength of these attached motivating feelings is powerful enough, the level of awareness recognizes this as a new thought and thus we become aware that something other than our “normal” processing has kicked-in. Sim Liddon (1989 p. 84) also says it is the strength of the feeling: “Gestalt images symbolize feelings, but, at the same time, when a feeling is intense enough it brings the symbol to conscious awareness.” This contributes to our belief that we have free will. But, again, when does this form of free will happen? The answer may depend upon how far back in the chain of events we can trace the factors leading up to the “decision” and also depend upon the significance of the decision. We are all familiar with the student who claims that no amount of studying her history, her feelings or her predispositions can predict whether she will raise her left hand or her right hand - so this sort of empty decision-making probably is probably completely “free.” The student‟s larger and more important decisions – what to do upon graduation, where to live, etc. - are probably greatly influenced by her subconscious and superconscious. Our belief that we have a free will is very strong. We do not have sensory neurons in our brains that can tell us what is going on, so we are somewhat at a loss to explain our thought processes. At the same time we have a strong desire to discover truth, to explain the world, to understand our actions ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 603 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness and behaviors. This strong desire to understand ourselves may have lead to the creation of stories that describe our thought processes and make us feel comfortable in our world – thus the development of our feeling that free will controls our actions and behaviors. Frances Crick (1994 p. 265-268) says that people imagine that something called a “self” makes free will decisions, because they are not aware of the workings of those portions of the brain that plan their actions. The proposed model does not include a separate thing called a “self;” nor does it includes an “I” that makes our decisions; nor does it count upon a special thing called the “mind” which helps us “make up our mind.” Some would argue that society‟s need to assign responsibility for personal actions, and thus creating an argument for laws and punishments, contributes to the need for a concept of free will. This has been expressed as: “the belief in robust moral responsibility leads to the belief in free will” (Sommers 2007 p. 64). How critical is the answer to the question if we have free will or not? As long as humans feel that they have free will, they should continue to act as if they have free will and should continue to take responsibility for their actions.  role of language: Some have speculated that without language human consciousness would not have arisen, or at least, as Paul M Livingston (2004 p. 234) says: our insights “reveal the understanding of consciousness and the understanding of language as fatefully linked.” On the other hand Paul M Churchland (1996 p. 269) says: “The social institution of language has nothing to do with the genesis of consciousness.” This proposed model of consciousness does not dictate any particular method for explaining how humans developed consciousness. However it appears that once consciousness appeared, human language played a significant role in shaping our depth of consciousness. Here language helps us create symbols for objects and our feelings; it helps create structure and rules for manipulating these symbols; it helps create our world-view; and all of this sets a tone for determining which of our feelings enter into awareness. The advantages of language in expanding our awareness is also responsible for limiting our use of awareness: “It seems legitimate to say that when language reduces something to logical and rational concepts, it reduces or deemphasizes the „feeling‟ of the experience” (Liddon 1989 p. 71).  animal consciousness: The three-dimensional model helps explain human consciousness, but can it be applied to other things – living or not? Only partially. The type of consciousness that many of the “higher” mammals have seems to change over the course of day and night so they have some variations in their dimension of time. However most of these animals do not have the large changes in consciousness from childhood to death that characterize humans – they appear to have a condensed version of the human dimension of time. The same may be true of the consciousness dimension of breadth. Some mammal, like dogs, appear to experience both deep sleep and dreams; their activities are sometimes focused and sometimes they seem to be day dreaming. The largest difference between animals and humans is in the dimension of depth. All mammals have physical feelings from internal and external sources; some appear to attach basic emotions to some of these feelings – fear, excitement and even playfulness. However none of them seem to have a depth of consciousness that is similar to human‟s awareness. Their lack of language makes any awareness considerably different from human awareness, or as Sim C Liddon (1989 p. 217) says unsymbolized awareness “being essentially nonsymbolic, is presumably shared by our animal cousins, while the latter [natural ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 604 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness language systems] is symbolic awareness that is unique to humans.” It seems unlikely that any mammal has superconsciousness or subliminal feelings - none seem to have deep strivings for such things as truth, beauty and goodness. What about the “lower” animals? Bacterium respond to their environment, but is it proper to call this physical feelings? At what point on the evolutionary scale can we say that emotions or feelings are attached to physical impulses? Alva Noe (2009 p. 39-41) would argue that bacterium have a relationship with their surrounds even if they live in a simpler environment, so: “the problem of consciousness, then, is none other than the problem of life.” Others might disagree. This model of consciousness probably does not apply to nonliving things – things that do not respond to their environment.  computer consciousness: Computers can change their dimension called breadth by “going to sleep” or putting themselves in a “safe mode.” We can say that at some times computers are focused, but do they have a state that we can properly call day dreaming? Would we want a computer that is actively processing without a purpose? Consequently current computers seem to have a more condensed breadth dimension than most mammals. Computers will eventually become sophisticated enough so that they can change their responses over the dimension of time. They will probably respond to their environment in nonprogrammed ways so they will “learn” over the course of their life. Currently their variability over the dimension of time is constricted, but this can change with improved technologies. Computers ability to develop a real depth of consciousness is more speculative. Currently computers appear to operate only in the depth of awareness – they “know” what they are doing. Would we want to develop a computer with subconscious and superconscious operations? Computers can currently monitor their states and performance, but this appears to be a direct, rather than subconscious, process. Computers can set priorities for selecting functions and operations, but this appears to be somewhat different than attaching emotions to functions and processes. Computers might someday simulate human feelings or mental states “but the simulation of mental states is no more a mental state than the simulation of an explosion is itself an explosion” (John Searle 1992 p. 18). Computers can currently receive information from nearby people utilizing EEG technologies and might someday be able to receive information from organic systems utilizing quantum communications. Could this information include subliminal feelings? Can we develop a computer sensitive enough to receive EEG or quantum communications of subliminal feelings from spiritual beings – if there are such things? Such a technology would certainly expand the computer‟s depth of consciousness. 4. About The Model Underlying Assumptions Of The Model As Diego Fernandez-Duque (1999 p. 111) notes: “We need to know what our deepest assumptions are, how they affect what we can think and know, and whether they need to be revised in various ways. Otherwise, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 605 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness we are blind to the implications of our models, including both what they highlight and what they hide from us.” The major assumptions in this three-dimensional model are:  reality: This paper assumes there are real things in the universe - things do exist outside of the “idealists” mind. Real things have varying degrees of physicality. Some real things have basic physical properties like mass, spin and charge – even if we can never “see” these properties, but only their effects. Some real things are not physical at all - things such as numbers and concepts. Physical and non-physical realities can interact with each other. Daniel Dennett (2008) provides a strong argument that strong and widespread concepts, his term is “memes,” can create changes in the physical world as people act on their concepts. Some concepts have no basis in the physical universe unicorns may be a real concept to a third grade girl, but this does not mean that the unicorns have a physical existence. Some people divide real concepts into three realms – material, psychological and social (Poli 2009 p. 5).  truth: According to the old classical tradition, science discovers truths by developing an idea, devising experiments to test the proposal, and if the experiments don‟t invalidate the hypothesis it gradually becomes accepted theory - until something better comes along. Or as William James (1901 p. 495) put it: “Truth was what had not yet been contradicted.” However some philosophers have taken these scientific theories as statements of truth - some have even suggested that only scientific truths are true, all else is an illusion. This paper prefers Bernard d‟Espagnat‟s (2009) suggestion that according to the new quantum tradition, scientific truths should only be interpreted as prediction of things that we might observe; they should not pretend to be descriptions of reality. “It might be better to ask which is the more useful way of viewing the matter, rather than which is the true one” (Freeman 2003 p. 96).  knowledge: This model assumes that people discover insights and obtain knowledge by means other than science, in fact, very few people use the traditional scientific method to obtain knowledge. Most of us are able to build on oral and written knowledge obtained from others – testing statements and evaluating which seem appropriate for our time and place. Some of our knowledge is obtained from our own personal experience; some of these nonscientific insights and understandings are true.  determinism: This model assumes that the universe is not deterministic; both random and purposeful events happen. People seem to control some purposeful events – see “free will” see above.  consciousness: This model assumes that human consciousness is not a physical thing, but a concept - a useful concept. “Inner sensations cannot prove that consciousness has independent existence” (Walsh 2010). Our concept of consciousness can be considered to be true if it allows us to predict things that we can observe; it is not true just because it sounds right. Consciousness might be somewhat like the number five. People cannot see, touch or smell five, but people use five every day and they believe that five is real. Consciousness is a concept that can change at least one physical thing – our actions. This paper assumes that most humans develop a sense of consciousness that is not unlike that of other humans – there is little reason to question consciousness in other people, as Descartes (1641) did. Humans seem to develop similar concepts of consciousness by a combination of their brain and body acting in their environment. As Alva Noe (2009 p. xii) put it: “Consciousness isn‟t something that happens inside us. It is something that we do or make.” There have been several attempts to describe how the mechanics of this process works, but there is not yet a consensus on the subject. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 606 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness Limitations And Uses Of The Model Any model of consciousness will have some limitations and shortcomings, but it should provide a framework into which other concepts of consciousness can fit. This model does not try to address all issues related to consciousness: it does not discuss the roles of thinking and cognition in consciousness; it does not differentiate between knowledge and information; it does not address “mental states” and their relationship to consciousness; it does not attempt to identify the “mechanics” of consciousness; it does not locate the source or cause of consciousness. Some of these issues are addressed in Rudolfo Llinas‟ (2002) I of the Vortex and Paul Livingston‟s (2004) in Philosophical History and the Problem of Consciousness. There are several aspects of consciousness that might prove to be useful areas for future study using this model:  content of awareness: This proposed model focuses on the processes of consciousness, not the content of conscious thought. Such subject-matter subdivisions, as described by Alain Morin (2004), can be further refinements of this basic proposition. For example, the model does not differentiate between consciousness that focuses on a person‟s external environment and consciousness that focuses on a person‟s internal awareness. However some feel this may not be a useful tract - following the lead of David Armstrong (1981 p. 63): “introspective consciousness seems to have, but does not necessarily actually have, a quite special status in the world.”  memory: This model does not address how people remember (or misremember) their conscious experiences over time; a separate model for memory is needed. Memory appears to be a critical part of all three-dimensions of consciousness. Most of the processing of memory seems automatic, but bringing a feeling or event to the depth of awareness provides a greater likelihood that the event will be remembered over time. Daniel Dennett (2005 p. 167-172) refers to this as amplification and repetition or reflective power or echo power. What is the precise relationship between consciousness and memory?  the binding question: How we can pull together the inputs of all of our various senses and all of our subconscious and superconscious feelings to create the appearance of a consistent whole? This model does not address the question, but Ray Tallis (2010) provides a perspective to possible answers: Researchers have attempted to explain this unity, invoking quantum coherence (the cytoskeletal micro-tubules of Stuart Hameroff at the University of Arizona, and Roger Penrose at the University of Oxford), electromagnetic fields (Johnjoe McFadden, University of Surrey), or rhythmic discharges in the brain (the late Francis Crick). Most of these theories are really looking at only the depth of consciousness called awareness that comes and goes over the source of a day. If we see consciousness as three continuums that are continually operating, the question does not seem so difficult – the consistent whole may be always there running in the background.  mind: The concept of mind often refers to something separate from our brain, our body, and our consciousness. However as Nancey Murphy (2006) notes: “[W]e are our bodies – there is no additional metaphysical element such as a mind or soul or spirit.” As with consciousness, the concept of a mind probably should not be treated as a thing, but as a useful concept to explain the human condition. With ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 607 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness this expanded model of consciousness there appears to be little need to use a concept such as the mind – whatever the mind was supposed to explain now seems to be covered by this model of consciousness. In fact this model of consciousness could have been called a model of the mind instead.  self: Our current fragmented view of consciousness may be similar to the current fragmented view of self that is clearly described by Raymond Martin (2006 p. 302). For the concept of self he notes: “[I]f there is unity is sight, it is the unity of the organism, not of the self or of theories about the self.” Similarly, it may well take such a concept as a “unitary person” to accurately describe consciousness. On the other hand consciousness may be far more complex than we are imagining and the only way to answer our questions is to break consciousness into its component parts. “[W]e may be using the words consciousness and unconscious for too many somewhat distinct activities” (Crick 1994 p. 248). Implications Of The Model Evaluating this model of consciousness should not be unlike assessing other models. According to Eugen Zelenak (2007, p. 5) there are five criteria for judging models: In these tests we may either consider (i) whether they are internally consistent, (ii) whether they are coherent with some other assumptions we want to make, (iii) whether they match with what modern science tells us...(iv) with respect to their simplicity, and (v) with respect to the amount of counterexamples they have to face. Hopefully the readers of the model will make these assessments. If the model is successful there should be two primary benefits. With a more comprehensive definition of consciousness it may be possible that fewer researchers will “talk past each other” because they were discussing a different dimension of consciousness. With a better perspective of consciousness researchers can more clearly see how its various “parts fit together” and more easily visualize the whole. This three-dimensional model could lead to a variety of additional experiments that will help flesh out the details. Though many of these questions have been asked in the past, with this model the questions can be asked in a new light:  It is not clear that all physical feelings go through the subconscious to get to awareness, nor that all subliminal feelings go through superconsciousness to get to awareness – in emergency situations there may be a direct route to awareness. When awareness receives contradictory information from the subconscious and superconscious how are issues resolved? Is it only awareness that combines these two flows of information? Can feelings be combined, interpreted, evaluated and resolved at some other point before awareness?  How many modes of consciousness do we utilize at a single point in time? How quickly can we change back and forth between modes?  Questions can be asked about the interactions between different points in a single dimension. For example in the breadth dimension, what role does day dreaming play in our attentive state? In the depth dimension how do subconsciousness and superconsciousness interact? ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 608 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness  What are the relationships between the different dimensions of consciousness? For example, how do dreams (in the breadth dimension) affect states in the depth dimension of subconsciousness? And visa versa? What information flows between different dimensions? Does the information flow in both directions? Do these interactions change with various changes in the time dimension? When the details of this model have been fleshed out, it may be possible to complete a unifying theory of consciousness, rather than dozens of concepts that we currently hold that describe only a portion of the phenomenon. “But how are we supposed to get on with the research? A promising line of attack is to approach consciousness by way of the unconscious” (John Searle 1997 p. 199). References Armstrong, David M (1981) What Is Consciousness? in “The Nature Of Mind And Other Essays.” Ithaca: Cornell University Press Breen, Randy (2008) Lecture By Randy Breen Of Emotiv Inc For The Stanford University Computer Systems Colloquium, www.sciencestage.com/v/19497/demonstration-of-brain-computer-interface-using-the-emotivepoc.html Brothers, Leslie (2008) Is Consciousness Definable? in “Closer To Truth” edited by Robert Lawrence Kuhn. www.closertotruth.com/ Carruthers, Peter (2000) The Evolution Of Consciousness in “Evolution And The Human Mind.” University of Delaware, www.philosophy.umd.edu/Faculty/pcarruthers/Evolution-of-consciousness.htm Carey, Benedict (2010) The Riddle Of Consciousness. New York Times, February 5, 2010 Casert, Raf (2009) Mother: Son Was Aware, Not In Coma. Philadelphia Inquirer, November 24, 2009 Chalmers, David J (1996) Conscious Mind: In Search Of A Fundamental Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press Chalmers, David J (2000) Facing Up To The Problem Of Consciousness in Jonathan Shear‟s “Explaining Consciousness: The Hard Problem.” Cambridge: MIT Press Christianson, Wayne (2007) The Evolutionary Origins Of Volition in “Distributed Cognition And The Will” edited by Don Ross, David Spurrett, Harold Kincaid and G Lynn Stephens. Cambridge: Bradford Book Churchland, Patricia Smith (2002) Brain-Wise: Studies In Neurophilosophy. Cambridge: Branford Press Churchland, Paul M (1996) The Engine Of Reason, The Seat Of The Soul: A Philosophical Journey Into The Brain. Cambridge: MIT Press Clayton, Philip (2004) Mind & Emergence. Oxford: Oxford Press Crick, Francis (1994) The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search For The Soul. New York: Touchstone Books D‟Espagnat, Bernard (2009) Statement At The Templeton Prize New Conference, March 16, 2009. www.templetonprize.org Dennett, Daniel C (1991) Consciousness Explained. New York: Little Brown Dennett, Daniel C (2005) Sweet Dreams: Philosophical Obstacles To A Science Of Consciousness. Cambridge: MIT Press Dennett, Daniel C (2008) Real Patterns in “Emergence: Contemporary Readings In Philosophy And Science” edited by Mark A Bedau and Paul Humphreys. Cambridge: MIT Press Dennett, Daniel C (2008) Memes lecture April 16, 2008 at University of Pennsylvania Descartes, Rene (1641) Meditations On First Philosophy, Sixth Mediation: The Existence Of Material Things, And The Real Distinction Between Mind And Body as quoted in “Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings” edited by David J Chalmers. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 609 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness Dretske, Fred (2002) Conscious Experience in “Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings” edited by David J Chalmers. New York: Oxford University Press D'Zmura, Mike (2010) MURI: Synthetic Telepathy. University Of California Irvine, www.cbskab.ss.uci.edu/muri/research.html Eccle, John C (1994) How the Self Controls Its Brain. New York: Springer-Verlag Feng, Jonathan and Mark Trodden (2010) Dark Worlds. Scientific American, November 2010 Fernandez-Duque, Diego (1999) Attention Metaphors: How Metaphors Guide The Cognitive Psychology Of Attention. Cognitive Science, Vol. 23 Fernandez-Duque, Diego (2009) Cognitive Psychology. Villanova University course, Spring 2009 Freeman, Anthony (2001) Emergence Of Consciousness. Charlottesville: Imprint Academic Freeman, Anthony (2003) Consciousness: A Guide To The Debates. Denver: ABC Clio Press Gao, Helena H and John H Holland (2008) Agent-Based Models Of Levels Of Consciousness. www.santafe.edu/research/publications/workingpapers Grassie, William (2010) Advanced Methodologies In The Scientific Study Of Religion And Spirituality. Philadelphia: Metanexus Grosso, Michael (2010) Consciousness and Parapsychology: A Thought Experiment. Ions, Institute of Noetic Sciences, July 2010 Greenfield, Susan and Toby F T Collins (2005) A Neuroscientific Approach To Consciousness in “The Boundaries of Consciousness: Neurobiology and Neuropathology” Progress in Brain Research, Volume 150. www.science-direct.com Harmon, Katherine (2009) Conditional Consciousness. Scientific American, December 2009 Hobson, J Allen and Edward F Pace-Schott (2002) The Cognitive Neuroscience Of Sleep: Neuronal Systems, Consciousness And Learning. Nature Review, September 2002 James, Chris (2009) Communicating Person To Person Through The Power Of Thought Alone. University of Southampton, www.soton.ac.uk/mediacentre/news/2009/oct/09_135.shtml James, William (1901) Varieties Of Religious Experience. Minneola, NY: Dover Publications Johnson, Elizabeth A (2008) Quest For The Living God. New York: Continuum Press Kettell, Robert H (2009) Can A Person’s Consciousness Best Be Visualized By A Three-Dimensional Model? unpublished paper, Villanova University Lewicki, Pawel, Thomas Hill and Maria Czyzewska (1995) Nonconscious Acquisition Of Information. www.cogprints.org/722/0/lewicki Liddon, Sim C (1989) Dual Brain, Religion, And The Unconscious. Buffalo: Prometheus Books Livingston, Paul M (2004) Philosophical History And The Problem Of Consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge Press Llinas, Rudolfo (2002) I Of The Vortex: From Neurons To Self. Cambridge: MIT Press Lloyd, Dan (2007) Civic Schizophrenia in “Distributed Cognition And The Will” edited by Don Ross, David Spurrett, Harold Kincaid and G Lynn Stephens. Cambridge: Bradford Book Martin, Raymond & John Barresi (2006) The Rise And Fall Of Soul And Self. New York: Columbia Press McGinn, Colin (2004) Consciousness And Its Objects. Oxford: Clarendon Press Mele, Alfred R (2009) Effective Intentions: The Power Of Conscious Will as quoted in a book review by Manuel Vargas. www.ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=17385 Miles, Donna (2008) Army Research Grant To Explore Communications Through Brain Waves. American Forces Press Service, www.defense.gov/News/newsarticle.aspx?id=51091 Morin, Alain (2004) Levels Of Consciousness And Self Awareness. www.cogprint.org/3808/1/levels.pdf Murphy, Nancey (2006) Bodies and Souls, or ‘Spirited Bodies? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Newberg, Andrew & Eugene D‟Aquili (2001) Why God Won’t Go Away. New York: Ballentine Press Noe, Alva (2009) Out of Our Heads: Why You Are Not Your Brain, And Other Lessons From The Biology Of Consciousness. New York: Hill and Wang ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 610 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 584-610 Kettell, R. H. A Model of Human Consciousness Phaf, Hans and Gezinus Wolters (1997) A Constructivist And Connectionist View On Conscious And Nonconscious Processes. Philosophical Psychology, Vol. 10, No. 3 Pinkel, Benjamin (1992) Consciousness, Mater And Energy: The Emergence Of Mind In Nature. Santa Monica: Turnover Press Poli, Roberto (2009) Analysis – Synthesis. www.metanexus.net Reisberg, Daniel (2006) Cognition: Exploring The Science Of The Mind. New York: W W Norton Rosenthal, D (1990) A Theory Of Consciousness. ZIF Report No 40, 1990, in “Consciousness Explained” by Daniel Dennett (1991). New York: Little Brown Rosenthal, David M (2002) Explaining Consciousness in “Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings” edited by David J Chalmers. New York: Oxford University Press Ross, Don (2007) Distributed Cognition And The Will. Cambridge: Bradford Book Sarovar, Mohan (2009) as quoted in “Easy Go, Easy Come: What Spoils Quantum Entanglement Can Also Restore It” by George Musser. Scientific American, November 2009 Scanlon, Fr. Michael J (2008) Presence And Absence Of God a Villanova University course, fall 2008 Scott, Alwyn (2001) We Could Be Siblings Yet: Reflections On Houston Smith’s ‘Why Religion Matters’ in “The Emergence of Consciousness” edited by Anthony Freeman. Charlottesville: Imprint Academic Searle, John R (1992) The Rediscovery Of The Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press Searle, John R (1997) The Mystery Of Consciousness. New York: New York Review Of Books Sheldrake, Rupert (2008) Mysteries Of Consciousness in “Matter and Beyond” edited by Mary Lynn Schiavi. www.ebru.tv/en/p.fullepisode.html?prg=Matter%20And%20Beyond Simonov, P V (1994) Consciousness And The Brain in “Neuroscience and Behavioral Physiology,” Vol. 24, No. 3 Sommers, Tamler (2007) The Illusion Of Freedom Evolves in “Distributed Cognition And The Will” edited by Don Ross, David Spurrett, Harold Kincaid and G Lynn Stephens. Cambridge: Bradford Book Stanford Encyclopedia Of Philosophy (2006) Quantum Entanglement And Information. www.plato.stanford.edu/entries Strickgold, Robert and Jeffery M Ellenbogen (2008) Sleep On It: How Snoozing Makes You Smarter. Scientific American, www.sciam.com Tallis, Ray (2010) You Won’t Find Consciousness In The Brain. New Scientist, January 7, 2010 Walsh, Roger (2010) Why Is Consciousness So Baffling? in Robert Lawrence Kuhn‟s “Closer To Truth” www.closertotruth.com/participatn/Alva-no/73 Winters, Leslie (2003) Communicating By Brain Waves. Psychology Today, www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200307/communicating-brain-waves Zelenak, Eugen (2007) A Problem For The Kantian-Style Critique Of The Traditional Metaphysics. www.metanexus.net ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

234 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Article Hollows of Experience Gregory M. Nixon* Illustration: Klossowski’s (1969) labyrinth “If being is to unveil itself, it will be in the face of a transcendence and not an intentionality; it will be brute being caught in the shifting sands, a being that reverts to itself: it will be the sensible hollowing itself out.” Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible, 1968, p. 210 Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 235 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience TABLE of CONTENTS Abstract … 236 Part I: Being and the Question of Its Conscious Quality §1. Representation and Categorization §2. Conscious Epistemology of Consciousness §3. Non-Conscious Experience §4. Language §5. The Subject: Assertion, Narrative, Intersubjectivity §6. The Beyond of Language … 237 Part II: Being and Becoming: An Ontology of Experience §1. The Future of Consciousness and the Origin of Experience §2. The Hollows of Experience … 262 References Endnotes … 279 … 285 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 236 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Abstract This essay is divided into two parts, deeply intermingled. Part I examines not only the origin of conscious experience but also how it is possible to ask of our own consciousness how it came to be. Part II examines the origin of experience itself, which soon reveals itself as the ontological question of Being. The chief premise of Part I chapter is that symbolic communion and the categorizations of language have enabled human organisms to distinguish between themselves as actually existing entities and their own immediate experience of themselves and their world. This enables them to reflect upon abstract concepts, including “self,” “experience,” and “world.” Symbolic communication and conceptualization grow out of identification, the act of first observing conscious experiencing and intimating what it is like, mimesis, a gestural protolanguage learned through imitation, and reflection, seeing oneself through the eyes of others. The step into actual intentional speech is made through self-assertion, narrative, and intersubjectivity. These three become the spiral of human cultural development that includes not only the adaptive satisfaction of our biological needs, but also the creativity of thought. With the mental-conceptual separation of subject and object – of self and world – the human ability to witness the universe (and each other) is the ground of our genuinely human quality. Consciousness gives human life its distinctively human reality. It is, therefore, one and the same ability that enables us to shape planet Earth by means of conceptual representations (rather than by means of our hands alone) while also awakening us to the significance of being. Looking beyond human self-consciousness to investigate the origin and nature of awareness itself in Part 2, reductive objective materialism is found to be of little use. Direct experience also falls short in that, in order to be transformed into objective knowledge about itself, it must always be interpreted through and limited by the symbolic contexts of culture and the idiosyncratic conceptualizations of the individual. Awareness in itself must thus be considered ultimately unexplainable, but this may more indicate its inexpressible transcendence of all symbolic qualifiers than its nonexistence. It is suggested that awareness is not “self-aware” (as in deity) but is instead unknowing yet identical with the only true universal: the impetus of creative unfolding. Our human knowledge, as an expression of this unfolding, is seen to emerge from our conscious experiencing and, in turn, to have the power – and enormous responsibility – of directing that experience. Our underlying symbolic worldviews are found to be autopoietic: They limit or open our conscious experience, which, in turn, confirms those worldview expectations. As we explore a future of unforeseeable technological breakthroughs on an ailing planet who patiently copes with our “success,” truly vital decisions about the nature, meaning, and future of conscious experience will have to be made. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 237 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience PART I: Being and the Question of Its Conscious Quality §1. Representation and Categorization What if all this theory’s the equivalent of nightmare, its menace masquerading as philosophy? ... wouldn’t anything I’d come up with have to be a monstrous mix of substance and intention? (C. K. Williams, “The Method,” 1992, pp. 63-4) It is a curious thing to speak of consciousness, much less to enter a field commonly called consciousness studies. Study requires a separation from the object to be studied. It is curious enough to study the world with which we should be united through sensory links and telluric instincts, but, even more dubious, how can consciousness be separated from the conscious mind studying it? This methodological separation is expected to ensure impartiality, because only objects can be subjected in principle to validation by others. This applies even if the object is one’s own subjectivity: Introspective analysis requires a conceiver to conceive him- or herself. In this case, the object of investigation is identical with the investigator. Surely the fantasy of unbiased objectivity becomes at this point impossibly strained. Surely both the “object” and “subject” of such an undertaking are altered through their mutual implication. Thus the postmodern poet C. K. Williams above questions this paradox in his collection, A Dream of Mind (1992). Since theorizing about consciousness from the position of consciousness puts us in a unique position — one in which conscious experience is continually being created even while the object being studied transforms — the use of poetic expression seems to me well justified. To study this particular object is to change the way we think about it, and since both subject and object are aspects of consciousness, we become caught up in the polarities of a single circle or, better, a spiral. To study consciousness is to already engage in poiesis, a making or creating. What is the "substance" of the conscious mind to which Williams refers if not the fundamental reality of consciousness, of being, itself? Consciousness in itself is not the "content of consciousness," even if one’s own experience be that content. It is even questionable whether or not the "substance of mind" is a substance or if it might in some ineffable manner be, in itself, a dynamic process that yet supports such seemingly substantial content. But process or substance, it remains curious how such a subjective invisibility can yet observe itself as an object of study. It is just as curious to consider what sort of intention would drive one to do so. Despite philosophical hairsplitting on this term, it seems likely that the intentions of any organism can never veer too far from its innate evolved instincts for survival, predominance, and reproduction. The intention involved in dividing the mind from the world in the first place may be more understandable. In this way, we became masters of our territories, emerged as the predominant large animal on the planet, made nearly all environments habitable, and destabilized our planet. It is worth considering how this human intention to know — built upon instincts to predominate, grow, and complexify — might be infecting the primal "substance" which gave rise to it. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 238 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience In all our endeavors, even those undertaken to obtain objective knowledge, we most often continue to be driven by those primal instincts of "survival and reproduction," that is, of environmental control. So when raw experience or generalized awareness becomes conscious experience, i.e., self-consciousness, and looks "back" upon its source to study and understand it, it continues to be subconsciously motivated by the desire to master and control. This implies that the desire to understand and explain the source of consciousness is in reality the desire to explain it away — to sever all ties with its own transpersonal source. It is thus that machine consciousness can be thought possible — it will have no attachment to Nature or instinctive sources and no "unconscious" mind or emotions. With this in mind, I suggest the best way to approach the mystery of the existence of awareness in this universe is to be indirect. We must first understand how we became conscious of such awareness. By first investigating the source of personalized awareness, that is, self-consciousness — an ability seemingly only possessed by humans, with some possible exceptions among higher mammals — we may begin to comprehend the possibilities and limitations of our language-based, conceptualized mode of knowledge-creation. What has allowed us to conceive of the world “out there” as distinct from our selves or minds “in here”? It must be to do with the power of representation and the subsequent categorization of those representations. It is widely agreed that sensory input at some point in evolution led to representations, though it remains controversial whether these representations be understood as inner or, instead, as outer projections — the experienced reality of each creature according to its kind. Should an experienced reality even be termed a representation? Perhaps, but we can never be sure what exactly is being re-presented. Neither can we be certain of the nature of the lived reality of any other organism but our own, though we may conjecture that all organisms experience one. Not all organisms, however, enjoy representations, much less the power to categorize those representations. All organisms have experience in the sense that a nematodei, say, can be said to experience a change in its environment. Its primitive alimentary structure in fact connects it with its environment so intimately that it is conceivable that the entire ecosystemic itself experiences these changes, these pursuits, these avoidances. At this evolutionary stage, it is unlikely that experiential categorization consists of anything more than the most primitive excitations of eat, hide, or fertilize, and there is no reason to think that there is any centralized processor necessary to decide which. The organism responds throughout itself automatically, as it were. The nematode has no sensory organs as such but like its predecessor, the cell, prehendsii its environment through its skin and labial protuberances. Lacking explicit sensory distinctions and a central processor, it is very likely the family of nematoda have need of neither representations nor categorizations. As we climb the so-called evolutionary ladder,iii distinct sensory organs do appear: sight, smell, sonar, and what have you. But we have no way of knowing at what stage the senses become capable of being experienced separately. Sense organs at this stage may combine in a kind of synaesthetic blur to carry out instinctual stimulus-response ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 239 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience patterns, as Cytowic (1993) has suggested. Since in this case experience likely remains without a central experiencer, it must also remain without sensory distinctions, categorizations, or representations. Yet the response cannot be understood without the stimulus — the evolution of gills or lungs is a response to the presence of oxygen in the environment — so it is difficult to conceive of adaptive experience as only occurring in the isolation of the organism. It may be even more atomized within responding modules of the organism or it may be seen more holistically as a dynamic quality of the life of the entire ecosystem of which the individual organism is but a part.iv Likely, more highly evolved nervous systems that feed into brains do have something akin to central processors, if not quite yet a self (even a somatic self). The creatures involved should now be able to focus on distinct senses if it helped them negotiate their environment. If their senses re-present the world such activity is unknown to them: All existence for them is their environment and that environment is as much created by their corporeal apprehensions as by the various energies and molecular combinations of the supra-sensible realm. So whatever categorizations of their experienced world would now be possible would be those drawn from the natural differences of their sensory modalities and, of course, there would be a few other categories possible within the realms of those senses. The physical entity would still note which stimuli are threats, which are prey, which might be mating potential, and which matter not at all. These categorizations continue to be primal response categories without the need for conscious decision-making. The situation becomes more complex when we begin dealing with mammals that live in tightly-knit, highly competitive social groups. The same primal categories must now be applied to members of one’s own species but several subcategories become activated as well. For instance, allies and troublemakers must be recognized and particular rituals observed to keep those alliances oiled and those troublemakers at bay. Yet once we have entered the arena of recognition, we have entered what might be called re-representation and response categorization. Mimicry becomes a possibility and emotional bonds of surprising intensity can be created, at least according to observers of such social animals (e.g., Moussaieff Masson & McCarthy 1995). However, their categorizations remain emotionally based, as well. It is hard to imagine nonsymbolic animals conceptually categorizing objects or themselves or their own experience, though some researchers have attempted to show precisely that. How, after all, could they do so? With the arrival of speaking hominids, a net was thrown over the world and the entire progress of knowledge within the human species can be seen as a measure of the increasingly fine weave of the strands of that net. With the act of naming, each category can be further reduced to other categories and so on. What we call knowledge is based in increasing conceptual complexification involving both sub-sensory reduction and supersensory expansion. From infinitesimal superstrings to universe-sized God above, we refine and define every possible category of knowledge and there is no sign of a slowdown on the epistemological horizon. We have reduced the world to analysis and explanation. We have studied and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 240 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience explained instinctive behaviour, even a great deal of human behaviour. It seems only natural that we should turn our reductive curiosity upon ourselves and wonder whence this particular awareness that knows it is aware and that we alone seem to have. Since it is our conscious selves studying our conscious selves, it is indeed curious that few seem to note that this “monstrous mix” must in some reflexive manner change both the way we see ourselves and, just as obviously, the way we feel ourselves seen. By representing the world of experience – perceptually and conceptually – and then categorizing those representations, we reduce the world to objects of knowledge, the natural result of focusing on objects by subjects rather than experiences uniting both. As Jungian psychoanalyst Erich Neumann observed, vital components of direct experience get eliminated in this process of conscious division: The conscious mind is a cognitive system whose emphasis on clarity and discrimination tends to sunder the world-continuum into opposites and at the same time to eliminate systematically the emotional component of all that is alive. Thus, the world’s aspect of unity and continuity, as well as its liveliness and significance, graspable for instance through feelings and through intuition, must be renounced and is lost in the presence of the ego’s restrictedly specialized conscious cognition. These same excluded elements, however, play an emphatic and leading role in extraneous psychic cognition (1989, p. 13). The “excluded elements” are relegated to the unconscious while these oppositional dichotomies divisively create conscious knowledge. To examine minds, we must consider the minds of others or each of our own minds as it exists at times different from the present examining. To do otherwise is not only to add a subjective factor to our attempts at impartial examination but to be overwhelmed by present world awareness, rather than concentrating on the cognitive dissociation necessary to do the task at hand. This again requires the abstracting powers of language. So we look at mind and ask questions that will lead us down one roadway instead of another, and that roadway too soon forks in the same way. This is the path of either/or, the construction of a mental realm reduced to but one half of oppositional pairs. Linguist Ferdinand de Saussure noted (1959) that all terms of language are built from these “binary oppositions” that refer essentially to each other. Through the relentless logic of the theorist or the experimentation of the researcher, we march down the fork in the road that we believe will lead us to truth, to knowledge of the real. When the march picks up speed, the quest is invigorating, but do we ever really forget or seal off the road not taken? Can one half of a polarity contain the meaning of the whole? Yet on we march. We note that our sensations are directly connected to the sense organs of the body. When we hit our thumbs, we hurt. Mind and body are felt to be one. We bury our dead with tokens from this world for their further travels in the next. In the West, Platonism teaches us that the soul is separable from the body and Christendom takes it up. In the East, the main religions agree, adding that our bodies and the very material world they sense are illusions. The door is opened to dualism and idealism. Today, the same questions are asked by seeking individuals and students in Philosophy ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 241 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience of Mind 101 as have always been asked: Does the brain create mind? If not, then does mind create brain? If so, then spirituality or idealism is the path to take, for surely there is an übermind behind my own. If we answer that brain does create mind, then we must ask just how it does so and where in the brain mind is located. This is the problem for materialism and the most popular responses have been neural functionalism — that the computational networks of neural connections create a mind — and eliminative materialism — that there is no mind or that it really is nothing but neurons and their processes. There are paths which attempt to partake of more than one road at once: Perhaps the brain is not a producer of consciousness but a transducer which focuses diffuse mental “energies” into individual experience. Each road, each choice, leads onward in one direction only until one becomes so comfortable on his theoretic one-way path that he is not concerned at all that the view is obscured on either side. Other possible paths seem to him at best mistaken and at worst stupid and dangerous. A moment’s view from an aerial perspective would show us all sorts of hominids enclothed in layers of conceptual certainties striding in all directions at once. What no perspective will reveal is that every traveller, be she pilgrim or conquistador, has made de-cisions and set herself on a path that will directly affect her conscious experience of life. The manner of her seeking or believing or accepting this or that as “reality” will accord with her daily sense of existence. The crawling snake does indeed twist around and bite its own tail. Like other empirical studies, the "science of consciousness" has proceeded by division. Many have noted that it was not until fairly recently that the existence of a conscious agent with individual subjective intentions was even an acceptable discussion topic in many scientific circles. Cognitive science, among other new disciplines, has found a place for consciousness though it seems much more interested in the contents or effects of consciousness rather than phenomenological consciousness itself. Now that the conscious mind has been admitted to exist, questions may be asked along the lines mentioned above. Such considerations have never held back the "advance of knowledge" or the "march of progress" in the past few centuries, especially by those who have benefitted the most from a rampant materialism. Those who have raised the study of consciousness into such widespread popularity today see no need now to consider the uroboric twisting involved in being a mind studying mind. Psychology has been at it for a century or more, but it has mostly been focused on behavioural statistics or emotional adjustment. Consciousness Studies, as a nascent discipline, is little more than a decade old and it has found the need to struggle for respectability by proclaiming itself as a science too. Indeed, the big Tucson conferences on consciousness wear the subtitle, "Toward a Science of Consciousness."v It seems to be accepted fact that we cannot gain certain knowledge of anything unless we study it empirically and impartially through scientific procedures. This split of the object to be studied from the subject studying it is already an ontological bifurcation. If we accept the brain as the material cause of felt sensation and mind, we must then face the next fork in the road. Does just brain cause consciousness or is the brain merely ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 242 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience the apex of the entire nervous system which thus involves the whole body? Next, does the brain work through its genetic programming to naturally create mind or must it be prodded by circumstances in its environment? The next fork is whether those environmental circumstances, i.e., worldly experience, can change the brain or its synaptic connections. If the brain is as dynamic as the latter question implies (e.g., Damasio 1999; Deacon 1997; Edelman 1987, 1992; Edelman & Tononi, 2000; Ornstein 1991), we next must wonder just how adaptable the brain is, what are the limits allowed through its genetic constraints. And the biggest question of all remains: Just how does any material entity, even one as complex as a mammalian brain, ever create mind, consciousness, or even just experience? The reader will see that we have gone full circle back to choice one: The fundamental division in approaches to the question of consciousness is whether the brain creates experience or experience the brain. Obviously the sciences lean toward the former, though the neuroscientific proposal of the dynamic brain that changes as a result of experience softens this stance. Experiential practices that accept any sort of transcendence of bodily limitations, such as psi or meditation, assume the latter in the sense that the origin of awareness beyond the brain may change neural processing within the brain. Any experience that precedes, exceeds, or transcends the brain is felt to be more real than the brain itself so the brain’s reality can only be reactive. This is the question of consciousness and clearly any possible approach to it will be limited by primary contexts such as the medium of communication (in this case language) and the fundamental assumptions about reality with which we naturally begin. §2. Conscious Epistemology of Consciousness What might be said of the things in themselves, separated from relationships to our senses, remains for us absolutely unknown. (Immanuel Kant 1787/1996, I.§8.i) Two elements seem to me necessary for the study of mind to take place: language and time displacement (and the two are not unrelatedvi). Conceptual demarcation is made possible for us cultural critters through language. Consciously created symbols have made science possible. Conceptual language suggests that we conceive of consciousness as an entity, much as we previously birthed the world as object and the self as subject. The process is communication. When we speak, we act, and when we act, as George Herbert Mead (1963) wrote, we take the position of the other and act back toward ourselves. From the other’s point of view, we become an object to ourselves and assume a mind that understands as we understand as the recipient of our communiqué. But it is the naming that demarcates: “Even as Adam in Holy Writ, we name one another. As those who bestow names, we are creating observers even as we participate in the behavior of everyday, and in our naming we, you and I, create our textual world” (Richardson 1989, p. 46). Simultaneously, it must be considered that the naming which artifactually distinguishes one thing from another does so by creating a distance between the two, but this is not a spatial distance so much as a temporal one, suspending general ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 243 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience awareness in a brief time delay while we focus attention on one explicit object or another through the filter of memory and self-identity. This is to say that our minds are experienced in isolation: as distinct from the material world, from other minds, and from our own bodies through a delay in reaction time. Many Western philosophers (e.g., Nagel 1987), following Descartes, have declared that the one thing of which we can be certain is the experiencing of our sole self. However, the assumption of such fundamental solipsism may be yet another construction of an even more primary intersubjectivity, the illusion produced within the linguistic constraints of a culture that emphasizes individualism. The sense of an inner, isolated, private self has become commonplace for us — though such a private self may in reality be a cultural and autopoietic construction. Not only does language extend the present by devising memoried pasts and anticipated futures, but it holds the immediacy of experience in abeyance until, through words and memory, it can be literally re-cognized and reexperienced after it has been placed within our categories of expectation. Such conscious re-experiencing requires a fraction of a second of time delay, as Libet (1992) and others have shown. Naming, conceptualizing our own experience, creates a conscious distance from it. It may well have fenced us into a new temporal space to which we have given the term “mind.” No longer immersed in unadulterated, living experience, we make experience conscious with the cognitive displacement of mind. When experience becomes conscious, it has itself become an object. No longer one with the environment, we now feel ourselves as distinct from it, opposed to it. In the same way, we become aware of ourselves in the world and self itself is objectified. Experience simpliciter does not know; it acts and reacts. Only with the added quality of consciousness does knowing begin. It is conscious experience that knows and it is through conscious experience that the world, or anything else, is known. Of course, since such knowledge is itself consensual, relative, and autopoietic, it may not equal absolute truth.vii And that is the curious thing. For can we know of anything outside of our conscious experience? Experience becomes conscious precisely because it becomes known. New knowledge must be constructed upon the previous foundations of the known so is always limited, narrow, and contingent. Both assuming the reality of the material world or believing in the primacy of the inner self are products of our conscious experiencing, of knowledge creation. In point of fact we do not and cannot know of anything outside of our conscious experiencing.viii The act of knowing or even imagining is a conscious act. Of course, we may (consciously) assume or guess that there is a more ultimate reality beyond anything we can consciously experience, but such must remain, by definition, unknown and unknowable. The master philosopher, Immanuel Kant, made this point almost unassailable in arguments as convincing as they are difficult. But difficult or not, we ignore his conclusions at our peril: “What might be said of the things in themselves, separated from relationships to our senses, remains for us absolutely unknown” (1787/1996, I.§8.i). Yet the “separation from the [subjectivity of the] senses” is precisely the imperative perspective of the sciences. A materialist-reductionist is expected to assume a position of absolute objectivity without any subjective presence because only thus, it is ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 244 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience imagined, can pure reason be untainted by subjective projection. It demands that we observe without the interpolation of an observer, which is, of course, impossible. This is the position clearly and simply defended by Thomas Nagel, especially in his aptly titled collection of essays, The View from Nowhere (1986) and elsewhere (1974, 1987). If my mind, or your mind for that matter, is not “out there” beyond itself, how can we pretend to have such a perfectly objective viewpoint? To objectify a mind-independent reality, then to look for mind in that mind-independent reality, is a bizarre sort of logic to say the least.ix The fact of the matter is that we cannot observe without being a conscious observer; we cannot be rational without being a mind employing its sense of rationality. As George Zebrowski expressed it in Omni: “The dream of reason is to step outside the human skin and see reality plain, free from social and adaptive biological prejudices, to glimpse the ‘thingness’ of all the ‘otherness’ outside our minds that is not us. We can talk about it, but have we ever been ‘outside’, even for a moment?” (June 1994, p. 46) More recently, Max Velmans (2009) has ably defended the notion that so-called objective reality is in fact our very consciousness – in that our sensory habits, memoried anticipations, and cultural contextualizing create the theatre of our experiences. This is not idealism that says the external world is unreal; it is instead mental realism, which claims the world we experience is in part created by that experience. Gordon Globus (1995) has noted that the brain itself is part of this perceiver-dependent world (but a quantum electrodynamic process in “real reality”). A reality distinct from our own is experienced by a bat, certainly, but also by an indigenous tribal person. The “material” reality we so assiduously study is continually created and changed by our conscious experience of it, in this view, and can never be known independently. A “real reality” of the “things in themselves” beyond all experienced realities is assumed to exist, but there can never be objective access to it. On the other hand, the materialist would reply that, obviously, it is external reality that continually changes our conscious experience, but with the added assertion that consciousness itself is created by – is a product of – the material world and its interactions. It is indeed a “curious thing” to state that the material world has generated the consciousness which first revealed the lineaments of that world, but, curious or not, objective materialism, that is, science, has the track record to make a strong case for its claims. It all begins with the established laws of science, which its adherents claim have validity beyond any conscious awareness of them. In other words, the laws of science are “the things in themselves” or at least a part of them. Furthermore, the application of those laws have led us through an industrial revolution, into the age of technology, and onto the wave of the digital revolution. Who can argue with such material success? The slag-heap of history is replete with the fallen idols and accepted truths that once germinated from such sources as faith, hope, fear, and, yes, even experience. Once these traditional facts and cosmic verities were exposed to tests of experimental verification, replication, and application, their fundamental unreality became apparent, at least from the perspective of science. The argument usually states that one need only consider the worldviews of preliterate peoples with their gods and demons confabulated to explain weather and sickness or even current testimonies of faith that continue their campaign against naturalistic causation as found in, for example, evolution, natural disaster, and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 245 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience daily human behaviour. The sun, according to astronomy, is but an ordinary star among zillions. Earth itself is not flat but is instead but a spherical speck in an immeasurable cosmic sea. There is no life force or élan vital; life processes are but particular molecular arrangements influenced by unusual chemical reactions, according to biology. From the scientific explanation of the human body’s functions and dysfunctions to the disappearance of the ether, phlogiston, souls, and magic, once dearly held convictions have been ruthlessly uprooted or atavistically clung to as folk beliefs or psychological security blankets. Based in the fundament of objective materialism and economic rapacity, progress of science and technology has been relentless in all spheres of human endeavor: Why should the mind or conscious experience be any less explainable from the same perspective? And is there any reason why that explanation should not find practical application in ever more complex, lifelike technology? At least this seems to be the justification for the scientific study of consciousness. But the fact remains that the minds that have made such material progress possible have ignored their own existence and complicity. Marching relentlessly down the yellow brick road, they have failed to notice the wizard behind the curtain who has been pulling the strings on the puppet called rationality. Science, attempting absolute objectivity, takes “the view from nowhere.” This “nowhere” of absolute objectivity is absolutely beyond subjective experience, by definition, so one is forced to imagine mentally that aforementioned mind-independent reality and imagine oneself within it. To imagine mind in a mindless nowhere is magical thinking indeed. We see that, to begin with, science assumes a worldview, a perspective outside of conscious experience, which is impossible and, finally, a fantasy. In this way, the study of consciousness attempts to become thoroughly objective: One looks for signs of conscious experience in the material world (almost always the brain) and then attempts to trace it back to its triggers and traces. It is interesting to note that the usual scientific approach does not include looking “back” at one’s own consciousness; presumably because this procedure would become tainted with subjective input and affect. For this reason, philosophical phenomenology and psychological introspectionism, not to mention meditation or the expressive practices of the arts, are considered to be of no use. The “inner scientists,” the actual subjects doing the scientific studies, it must be assumed, exist as nothing but mechanical data recorders.x Needless to say, the end result is scientism, a shriveled respect for human conscious experience. Since it is no longer seen as primary but as just another unusual phenomenon produced by the forces of evolution in a material world under the rule of natural law, it need not be given the high status we conscious experiencers have traditionally assigned to it. This refusal to comprehend consciousness as the arbiter of all realities there may ever be – including the imagined “reality” of objective materialism – is necessary for the scientific-technological program to continue its materially successful march. If you cannot observe, get hold of, grasp, count, quantify, measure, or examine a phenomenon – and I mean here the phenomenon itself, not its effects – then such a phenomenon cannot be accepted as real. Thus strict scientific methodology is not going to be able to deal with awareness itself.xi The only choices for materialism are to quantify, measure, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 246 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience and examine the neural correlates and declare them to be the thing in itself, as in eliminative materialism, or to quantify, measure, and examine the qualitative effects and declare them to be the phenomenon itself, as in experimental psychology. That awareness in itself is a different category of reality from its perceived sources or qualities has often been argued, but most often the argument is simply that mind is not matter, that consciousness is not neurons or synapses or microtubules, as in Chalmers (1996). It needs to be also emphasized that awareness is not the same as the qualities of which one is aware. Awareness itself is not feelings, memories, thoughts, perceptions, or apprehensions. It is what makes these phenomena possible. In Jaynes’ (1976) metaphor, awareness is like the light of a flashlight in the dark that reveals objects and qualities but is not the same as those objects and qualities. Furthermore, the light cannot be shone upon itself, so one is left with attempts to try to understand it by studying the objects – the qualities and affects – it illuminates. So what is awareness in itself? It is odd to realize that whatever answer to that question I attempted here would be equivalent to an attempt to shine a light upon itself. The assumption is, of course, that language can communicate anything without altering it. Perhaps it should be considered that to the extent that consciousness is defined, it is also defining. That is to say, our understandings and assumptions – our cognitive schemata – may reduce or shape nonspecific awareness into individual consciousness as much as do our particular perceptions. In this sense, language not only describes but constructs the object being observed. Awareness observed is reduced to consciousness created, that is, it conforms to its concept. Consciousness then proceeds as an autopoietic manifestation of itself. I will later submit that experience in itself is the result of sensations generated at the point where minute entities like cells or even atomic or subatomic systems interact, but for this birth of sensation in interactive friction to be possible, there must be some sort of awareness-in-itself, a universal background of awareness out of which such primordial experiencing can emerge. This background may be aware but aware of nothing, as though in deep, dreamless sleep, a field of infinite potential, waiting, so to speak, for time to begin. How else can we account for raw experiential sensations without falling into infinite regress? Whether explaining, discovering, or describing such arcane mysteries as the origin of the universe, the nature of time, the emergence of life on Earth, or the enigma of our being here to experience it, it is so easily forgotten that our message is first and foremost found in our medium. Our algebraic notations, our geometric theorems, our words, even our “computer enhanced imagery” are all cultural icons. Energy itself remains a mystery beyond the breakthrough squiggle of e=mc2 and certainly beyond the word “energy.” What we know is knowledge, knowledge that in some symbolized form has been made amenable to a thinking consciousness. There is little doubt about the success of science in explaining the world or the even more obvious success of its offspring technology in creating a new one. The forward plunging prometheans who currently seem to be our cultural avatars no longer take the time to look back nostalgically at a participation mystique with nature or even pause to wonder just what it is we are building here or where we are heading. Our intricate ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 247 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience descriptions reach right down into the subatomic non-world of quantum physics and out into cosmic black holes in which the usual laws of physics disappear — forthrightly attempting conceptually to capture timeless and spaceless events. Still, since the observation and conceptualization of phenomena adapt them to fit into the mold of our current consciously experienced reality, it seems a contradiction to hope to explain the nature or origin of awareness itself.xii Creating new objects of knowledge makes them part of the objective, material, spatial universe that is understood by science to be fundamental and mind-independent, so discovering and explaining awareness or experience in this way involves an unthinkable paradox. With this in mind, it seems titanic hubris to assume our physics is near to an all-inclusive Theory of Everythingxiii or that the end of science is nigh since all things are almost explained in their entirety, as John Horgan (1996) has written. Amidst this vast expansion of knowledge into the mathematically measured very small, very large, or very distant, there remains this disquieting apprehension that the essence of awareness, very near indeed, continues to evade our squiggly explanations or our fervour to build and control. The very language of the possibility of absolute scientific knowledge is rife with cultural assumption and revelatory of the desire for omnipotence as much as omniscience. We cannot even properly think about the world alone without observers. How are we to twist our thinking back to encompass that which makes it possible? Perhaps the experience that undergirts consciousness is unthinkable. I foreshadow my purpose here: What if awareness or experience is as all-pervasive and foundational as universal background radiation? In that case, it makes all experienced phenomena possible (including conscious experience). No matter what strange shapes or sensations these phenomena may take, they are similar if they all arise from a fundamental be-ing or experiencing. It may be that, as Teilhard de Chardin (1959) phrased it, there is a within to all things. But no matter how it is phrased, it is wrong in that language is always insufficient and must be so. Being or experience in the material universe is so unexpected that it may be beyond or too pervasive or too slippery to be thought of as just one “phenomenon” among others at all. It may be beyond representation except as, for example, the condition that makes a universe possible. Awareness itself may be beyond representation but, if so, the scientific study of consciousness must ignore it for science is just this: the quest for adequate representation. It reduces consciousness to a concept among concepts, a phenomenon among phenomena, a representation among representations, so in this way it can be empirically studied as an object from the third person perspective. Science has achieved wonders, but I trust I have shown that its knowledge can never be complete. None of us, as possessors of first-person experience, can ever attain to what Dennett (1991) has called third-person absolutism. Absolute objectivity in a world of subjective experience is an impossibility, as much a fantasy as the megalomania that assumes awareness can be created through appropriate software or that nature can be ultimately mastered by the power of the human mind. §3. Non-Conscious Experience ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 248 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience [W]e experience the universe, and we analyze in our consciousness a minute selection of its details. (Alfred North Whitehead, Modes of Thought, 1938/1968, p. 121) Among the many other binary forks in the road toward the explanation and definition of consciousness is the one in which some loosely identify “consciousness” with “experience” (and often, generously, with “awareness” too despite the fact that this term connotes less specificity and individually-focused attention), and others make a distinction between conscious experience and experience without the added quality of consciousness, i.e., non-conscious or experience. It seems likely that the way we explain and define conscious experience directly affects the manner in which we consciously experience. It is thus very important that we proceed cautiously when eliding similar definitions into one another. Those of the higher order thought or perception school of philosophy equate consciousness with self-consciousness since our human type of consciousness, i.e., selfconsciousness, is all we know first-hand of consciousness of any kind. Tor Nørretranders agrees, adding the qualities of self-consciousness to consciousness itself: “Consciousness is the experience of experiencing, the knowledge of knowing, the sense of sensing” (1998, p. i). In other words, self consciousness is what we mean when we refer to the nominative consciousness, which elsewhere is known as conscious experience. Can we deconstruct this phrase by asking what is conscious experience if we extract the conscious modifer? We are left only with experience, that is, experience without the addition of a symbolic, culturally constructed self to reflect upon it. For experience to become conscious, it must be readied for intellection. It must be sliced, diced, and made an object of the mind. In his watershed book, Julian Jaynes (1976, p. 23) made the point even more simply: “Consciousness is a much smaller part of our mental life than we are conscious of, because we cannot be conscious of what we are not conscious of.” He continued with an apt image: How simple that is to say; how difficult to appreciate! It is like asking a flashlight in a dark room to search around for something that does not have any light shining up on it. The flashlight, since there is light in whatever direction it turns, would have to conclude that there is light everywhere. And so consciousness can seem to pervade all mentality when actually it does not. Arguments against distinguishing between experience as such and experience that has become conscious have been stubborn and steadfast. They usually insist that experience means consciousness in everyday speech, at least most of the time. If something is experienced, it must have been consciously attended to, so the argument goes, otherwise it is merely something like autonomic activity. But non-conscious experience is not just bodily functioning. Non-attended experience has affect — that is, it disturbs or creates emotions — and it has notable effects, too, on actual behaviour or on thought. Consciousness may also differ from experience-in-itself in that such experience ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 249 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience cannot be an unadulterated object of knowledge; it cannot be conceived without interpretation. Abstract conception is possible only with concepts; nothing can be known without knowledge. Experience, as such, can only be experienced (a similar situation to each of our isolated experiences of consciousness). In our talk about consciousness, we seek conceptual knowledge about that which creates conceptions. We may succeed in describing consciousness, but its “raw” experiential essence must escape the net of our conceptions. Yet we have far too many grounded theories and too much evidence for such primary experiencing to continue to be ignored. Conscious experience is understood here as a threshold that, once crossed, cannot be uncrossed without losing, in essence, consciousness. With this in mind, I suggest the distinction between consciousness and experience is worth making. If the terminology offends, call it the difference between mind or self consciousness and consciousness without mind (or self). The idea remains the same. What is it like to be a bat, to have non-conscious experience? We do it all the time but we return with only holes in our memory. Perhaps it is there we need to search for the hollows of experience out of which we emerged. One may wonder how it was possible to first construct such a bridge to a selfconscious vantage point whence experience could view itself. I think the bridge is a symbolic bridge. §4. Language It is in words and language that things come into being and are. (Martin Heidegger 1987, p. 13) Canadian neuropsychologist Merlin Donald (1991) builds a strong case for the evolution of cognition in humans that could be adapted to the ontogenetic development of the individual toward consciousness in individuals. Donald’s explanation of “episodic culture” for nonhuman animals is mainly that they live in a timeless present of biological stimulus and response. Early prelinguistic hominids developed a “mimetic culture” and it is this that allowed erectus his million year span as a toolmaker and wanderer with few cultural advances of which to speak. Though not comparable to healthy adult animals, infants too seem to begin life in an undifferentiated present. Cohen writes that a “newborn baby is barely able to see. He or she knows nothing, cannot speak a word and has no idea what an idea might be. He or she has no sense of identity” (1998, p. 78). Its ability to suckle, cry, and such things is almost certainly a biological instinct that needs no triggers but birth itself. There is wide evidence of a baby’s early ability to imitate the facial expressions of others. There is no evidence to show that a baby knows what it is doing. Imitation may be part of the process of learning to manage its primary experience, that of embodiment. As it thrashes about, it learns over which of the things it feels or sees in the world it has control. It discovers there are certain sounds that it can control and others that it can’t. At first, this proprioceptive sense of its corporeal abilities and limitations is unclear and it experiments through unconscious imitation to test its control. What it is doing is learning to sense itself physically. This is the seed of self-identity and when this fundament is disturbed so are the memories of which the self consists, as was made ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 250 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience clear by Rosenfield in his discussion of a situation in which proprioception was lost: "Madame I's case shows, I believe, that there are no memories without a sense of self. Without knowledge of one's own being, one can have no recollections" (1992, p. 41). Once “embodied”, the infant remains curious about the movements and presence of its primary caregivers. It observes them acting in those complex patterns we recognize as culturally informed or conscious. Not understanding at this point, it feels itself mesmerized, as it were, and unconsciously absorbs a surprising number of subtle mannerisms from those caregivers, especially the mother. This is the stage of identification Freudians and other specialists in child development have noted. At this stage, the child’s development parallels that of the mimetic hominids in that it cannot speak as yet but it assiduously strives to mimic, to be like, those who care for it. Mimesis, as Lev Vygotsky (1934/78) first noted and Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1973) agreed, is an essential forerunner of language acquisition and is not to be identified with imitation as such. Mimesis implies the patterns or structures of behaviour are assimilated but the individual often attempts to uniquely express himself or herself within them. It is this window of rudimentary experimentation that allowed erectus to be as successful as he was (Donald 1991). Such mimetic experimentation is precisely what leads the toddler to learn her first words. As already foreshadowed above, it seems clear we learn who we are through interactions with other subjects — and for this language is the culmination and necessary final step. Proprioception, identification, and mimesis are the three essential foundations for language acquisition and thus true intersubjectivity. They indeed remain part of our linguistic interactions throughout life, as well as being part of our unique but changing sense or concept of self. But it remains this last step — the emergence of linguistic assertion and intentionality that leads one to the concept of a self, of an I who I am — that is fundamental to actual consciousness of self as both subject and object. Prehistorically, we can never know exactly what led our ancestors across the symbolic threshold from mimetic gestures into actual speech with the syntax to indicate the long ago, the far away, the yet-to-come, and the invisible powers. This a mystery I hope to explore in the future, but at this point I can only guess that some existential crisis drove us, perhaps in desperate straits, to suddenly expand the horizons of our experience into what was previously not only unknown but unthinkable. We created consciousness out of a fearful need to be more than we are, biologically speaking. Perhaps the sacred awoke then, too, in mortal recoil. §5. The Subject: Assertion, Narrative, Intersubjectivity I’m in words, made of words, others’ words. . . (Samuel Beckett 1958, p. 386) Thus does Samuel Beckett refute the God-created subject of Descartes and the transcendental ego of Husserl. It’s not just that language creates conscious subjectivity, but that such subjectivity results from other persons through the internalization of the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 251 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience language-process already used by them. By becoming conscious as an aspect of our crossing the symbolic threshold and entering into the language-world, we find ourselves in tune and resonating with the presence of other persons/other minds. Other species and, likely, human infants participate in an almost mystical (to us) union with their environments. We do not. For us the environment has become the world, out there, in all its objective wonder or placidity. There is a huge difference between environment and world. Most of the world we experience is not even present at any particular time to our senses but is experienced in absentia through memory, knowledge, and imagination — all interior aspects of selfhood and symbol. Conscious assertion of experience sunders this primal unity into self and world. The animal and the object are both of the environment. Consciousness is not. Canadian philosopher Leslie Dewart notes that not only is the conscious quality of experience decisive but it is also divisive. Consciousness does not represent objects and bring them into its interiority, Dewart says. “Quite the contrary, what it achieves is to enable the experiencer to alienate him or herself, experientially, from objects, and therefore to relate itself to objects as such, that is, as other-than the experiencer” (May 1998). Nonhuman animals seem to experience only their environments, and their behaviour is as much a part of it as are their bodies and sensory experience. There is simply no need to postulate a time-delayed central station in which conceptual cognition occurs. Their experience appears to be a continuum in which subject and object are united and all a part of environment. Their perceptions are experience, other-initiated events in the environment are experience, their responses are also experience — and it must be remembered that their signalling is always an environmental response. As the perspicacious novelist Walker Percy has put it: “A signing [read: signalling] organism can be said to take account of those segments of its environment toward which, through the reward and punishments of the learning process, it has acquired the appropriate responses. It cannot be meaningfully described as ‘knowing’ anything else. But a symbol-using organism has a world” (1975, p. 202). And for experience of this world a self is required. With the discrimination of the objective from the subjective that is born with conscious experience and the symbolic interaction of language, world and self are created and are split into two entities, the essence of the Burnt Bridge from experience simpliciter. But this consciousness does not just happen accidentally: It must be asserted. Assertion. In a work that has received far too little attention, Dewart (1989) lays out the case for consciousness and language emerging simultaneously from the background of non-conscious experience. To be precise, Dewart focuses on speech itself. Early on — perhaps both ontogenetically and phylogenetically — speech is heard and responded to with growing comprehension, even mimicked, but it is not until the individual asserts himself into the conversation that the sense or process of awakening to the fact that one is in the world and experiencing it and can comment upon it begins. Speech must be asserted before a body can become a self who speaks — the assertion of experience in speech is to find oneself as the subject of such speech. It is this assertion, according to Dewart, that allows experience to become conscious. Consciousness is not ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 252 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience in addition to experience but is instead the reflected quality of it: “The possibility bears exploring that, whereas the human organism determines that human beings are able to experience, while reality determines in all essential respects what they experience, their ability to speak determines how they typically experience — namely, consciously” (p. 16). Consciousness, then, is not a state of the organism, any more than speech is. It is the assertion of experience as separate from the natural environment (which then becomes world). Speech did not evolve, according to Dewart, at least not in the usual sense of the term as genetic determinism. The first step in the transition from mere communication to assertive communication occurred when prehuman hominids began to experience the effects of their vocalizations as consequences of the vocalization. They could learn to do this in virtue of their highly evolved non-conscious perceptual, discriminatory, and integrative skills, and because the properties of vocal signalling, including lack of proprioceptive feedback, allowed the communicator to experience precisely what the communicand experienced in response to the communicator's vocal signalling and to identify that experience as the same experience he had when the same signal was communicated to him by another. There was probably no particular survival value in such an identification of the communicator with the communicand but the seeds of the mutuality of human culture had been sown. All cultures do any number of things that have no evolutionary survival value, including activities that are downright destructive to themselves. No point in building a list here but we need look no further than the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the current era for an example. The next step, and the important one that led across the symbolic threshold, for Dewart, is when the communicator began to experience the neuro-somatic antecedents of his signalling. He experienced himself as a communicator who had control over his assertions. This inner awareness and the intentionality of speech allowed him to use his speech within himself. He became his own communicand and, in the process, began the internalization of speech we now know as thought. It is only now, when the speaker found he could communicate by intending to communicate, that what Dewart calls “thematic speech” appeared and the communicator became aware of himself, i.e., became conscious of his experiencing. His cognition became, in essence, recognition, including the recognition of other minds.xiv For the first speakers, this must have been a laborious process. It was, after all, the beginning of cultural evolution as opposed to biological evolution and was, in that sense, unnatural. Still, the communication of inner experience must have been useful or at least interesting enough so that it was continued, probably only some of the time,xv through succeeding generations. This cultural selection for the best thematic speakers and interlocutors would have correlated with the reentrant mapping (Edelman 1987, 1989, 1992; Edelman & Tononi, 2000) of the brain’s neural networks and, over a long stretch of time, could have well have led to permanent biological evolutionary changes in the brain’s structure, especially the prefrontal cortex. Terrence Deacon (1997) has argued precisely this, citing the evolutionary theory of American psychologist Mark Baldwin from a century ago as its origin. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 253 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Now, as any developmental psychologist or speech therapist will tell you, the child learns grammar and speech readily as the result of the inborn language capacity of the brain. But it is not just biological, as Dewart has noted: Whereas now, after the species has appeared, the genesis of the individual consciousness results from the prior existence of the socio-cultural environment and speech, the genesis of consciousness in the species must have been contemporaneous, and indeed identical, with the genesis of assertive communication and of cultural society of the specifically human sort. Thus a theory of the origin of consciousness in the species must be at the same time a theory of the origin of cultural societies and of speech (1989, p. 176). Dewart writes that “an unsocialized humanoid organism — whether an ordinary infant or a mature feral adult — is not a conscious self...” (p. 170). Evolution of the dynamic brain in response to experience, i.e., Baldwinian evolution, indicates that culture has by now become as natural an attribute of the human as packing is to wolves. In our world, to live outside of culture is not to live as a human person. To be without language is to be without conceptual thought. Humanity in the “state of nature” (instinctually driven, no self-conception) simply is not humanity. There seems to be no path back to pure experience. Narrative. The second aspect in the creation of human subjectivity is the narrative reshaper of experience. As noted, mimesis and memory seem to precede and be foundational to the emergence of language. Perhaps, in turn, it is the combination of narrative and memory that produce the human experience of linear time. The great hermeneutic philosopher, Paul Ricoeur, begins his magnum opus in just this way: “Time becomes human time to the extent that it is organized after the manner of a narrative; narrative, in turn, is meaningful to the extent that it portrays the features of temporal existence” (1984, vol 1, p. 3). If the brain has indeed structurally co-evolved with language over the centuries, it would explain how human experience has come to have not only a conscious narrative quality but a pre-reflective prenarrative quality. Life as we experience it daily, in momentary events, has what literary theorist Stephen Crites (1986) has called a quasinarrative quality and Ricoeur a prenarrative quality. This may well be because of the way consciousness overlays the subtle but continuous awareness of time. For human persons, experience does not just take place in an eternal present. Ricoeur is ready “to accord already to experience as such an inchoate narrativity that does not proceed from projecting, as some say, literature on life but that constitutes a genuine demand for narrative” (1984, vol. 1, p. 74). As the brain is ready for speech, only awaiting the appropriate trigger, according to the Chomskyites, so experience is ready for narrative, only awaiting a narrator. Subsequent to the emergence of primary selfhood following upon the first assertion of experience in speech, it is now suggested that the narrative quality of language leads to the peculiar quality of self-recognition that we humans enjoy. A. P. Kerby makes the strong claim that “the self is perhaps best construed as a character not unlike those we ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 254 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience encounter almost every day in novels, plays, and other story media. Such a self arises out of signifying practices rather than existing prior to them as an autonomous or Cartesian agent” (1991, p. 1). The recognition of the self is, in a sense, the objectification of the subject by the subject; it is the birth of ego: the self we feel ourselves to be. Conversely, feeling that we know who we are objectively also changes the constitution of our decision-making strategies. The subjective self becomes reconstituted through the ongoing narrative of memory and self in interaction with other selves. It is an aspect of the hermeneutic circle that the self is in dynamic process amidst the intersubjective experience of narration. Subjectivity, then, is the experience of being the implied subject of discourse. We learn of and become ourselves from outside-in, as it were. Before we are capable of the rather advanced skill of narrating our own life-stories, we are already living a narrative. Kerby insists that “much of our self-narrating is a matter of becoming conscious of the narratives that we already live with and in — for example, our roles in the family and in the broader sociopolitical arena. It seems true to say that we have already been narrated from a third-person perspective prior to our even gaining the competence for selfnarration” (p. 6). Of course, our self-narratives must emerge out of these circumstances. Kerby concludes, “Such external narratives will understandably set up expectations and constraints on our personal self-descriptions, and they significantly contribute to the material from which our own narratives are derived” (p. 6). One of the first linguists to note the creative power of narrative was Émile Benveniste who maintained that the subject of speech is identical to the subjective self we each experience: “ ‘I’ signifies the person who is uttering the present instance of discourse containing ‘I’ ” (1971, p. 218).xvi Benveniste’s pronouncement on this matter has become famous in some circles and is worth citing again in its entirety: It is in and through language that man constitutes himself as a subject, because language alone constitutes the concept of ‘ego’ in reality, in its reality which is that of the being. . . . The ‘subjectivity’ we are discussing here is the capacity of the speaker to posit himself as ‘subject.’ It is defined not by the feeling which everyone experiences of being himself (this feeling, to the degree that it can be taken note of, is only a reflection) but as the psychic unity that transcends the totality of the actual experiences it assembles and that makes the permanence of the consciousness. Now we hold that ‘subjectivity,’ whether it is placed in phenomenology or in psychology, as one may wish, is only the emergence in the being of a fundamental property of language. ‘Ego’ is he who says ‘ego.’ This is where we see the foundation of 'subjectivity,’ which is determined by the linguistic status of ‘person’ (p. 224). To lose our ability to narrate our lives and to interpret that narrative is to lose our identity. More frightening than the thought of physical death is the thought of the death of the self. As witness to this, we might consider the many religions that espouse an eternally living self after the carnal form has returned to Earth. We might also consider the nervous anxiety or even anger that results in many people when they are confronted with the idea that the self they know themselves to be emerged within language through narrative acts. A brief observation of our species in the world is enough to be convinced ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 255 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience of the enormity of the lengths to which people will go to convince themselves of either the eternal or, what amounts to the same thing, the transcendental nature of the self. Oliver Sacks (1985) tells the “clinical tale” of a patient with amnesia as the result of Korsakov’s Syndrome. From moment to moment, he cannot remember anything of his actual past or what has just occurred and, as a result, has no continuing sense whatsoever of who he is. The patient is, according to Sacks, a nonstop talker who must make up his past every second in order to feel himself as existing in a world that has value and, it is to be supposed, reality. It is ironic that to give himself and the world some sense, the patient must manically tell nonsensical stories about himself; he “must literally make himself (and his world) up every moment” (p. 110). Without a narrated inner self, somewhat actual or actually fictitious, we must exist in a meaningless placidity or go mad without a world. Self-narration reveals to us our values and the very purpose we have for living and is capable of changing them as well. In this sense the hermeneutic circle that is the link between narrated self and languaged world may seem to be a vicious circle indeed; however, it should not be forgotten that narrative, and for that matter language itself, needs at least two “to tango.” Human minds, no matter how much they wish or fear that it were not the case, do not exist in isolation. No doubt there is more to the self than its narration. Dan Zahavi (2007) argues that self and other must pre-exist their narrativizaton, but only their relationship leads to such identification. In fact, he seems to lead toward the primary intersubjectivity of Gallagher (2001). Intersubjective relations lead to the sense of self and other, Zahavi avers, and it is that sense of identity that is formed by narratives of the self (and other). Intersubjectivity. When the explanations for consciousness are reduced to material causes they ignore a great deal of our real-life experience. The origins of consciousness must then be sought down the evolutionary ladder, perhaps with the beginning of central nervous systems or perhaps even with the advent of life itself (or, for the panexperientialist, within the inorganic). Conversely, when one turns inward so the perspective of subjective experience becomes the only focus, the empirical and objective become so ignored that all the important research in neuro- and cognitive science is not enough to keep consciousness on this planet. For the subjectivist, conscious origins tend to take off for more ethereal regions, above into the Great Beyond of transcendent spirituality. This is not the way we come to consciousness nor the way we experience it drawn through time. Percy, for example, sees conscious experience as evolving neither from third person materialism nor pre-existing in first person spirituality. He writes that “there has come into existence a relation which transcends the physico-causal relations obtaining among data. This relation is intersubjectivity. It is a reality which can no longer be understood in the instrumental terms of biological adaptation” (1975, pp. 271-2). One might call intersubjectivity the second person perspective. Psychoanalysis, though often disparaged as a credible mode of consciousness research by both objectivists and subjectivists, is itself an intersubjective process. It is ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 256 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience through the depth researches of this practice that the development of personal identity has been laid bare as the reflection of the young child’s perception of and relationship with significant others. The French psychoanalyst, Jacques Lacan (1977), has observed that children pass through a mirror stage at about four to six years old during which a proto-self appears that is then drawn out through identification into full-fledged selfhood: “This jubilant assumption of his specular image by the child at the infans stage, still sunk in his motor incapacity and nursing dependence, would seem to exhibit in an exemplary situation the symbolic matrix in which the I is precipitated in primordial form, before it is objectified in the dialectic of identification with the other, and before language restores to it, in the universal, its function as subject” (p. 6). This “dialectic of identification” is the interiorization of the self-identity perceived by identifying with the viewpoint of other significant persons upon one’s own being. In his researches into the phenomenology of memory, Edward Casey found himself agreeing that psychoanalysis reveals that “mind is ineluctably intersubjective in origin and import. Such is the implication of the idea of identification itself” (1987, p. 243). Subjectivity is relational. It results from the expectation of discovering a subjectivity similar to one’s own in others of our species.xvii Mothers will coo and talk to their children until the child responds accordingly to the anticipated emergence of its own selfhood. This is not to say that the child does not act as an original being before it becomes intersubjectively self-aware. The child exists and does interact with its environment as a unique entity, but it does not “contain” the knowledge of its unique selfhood. As Merleau-Ponty described it: “The consciousness of a unique ‘incomparable’ self does not exist in the child. This self is certainly lived by him, but is not thematically grasped in all cases. Other people are essential for the child. They are the mirror of himself and that to which his self is attached” (1973, p. 37). No human person can exist in isolation. Reared by nonhuman animals or brought up relationally deprived (whether by design or damage), the child may be said not to have achieved personhood. All our values, moral and otherwise, emerge from within the matrix of sociocultural relations. Our emotions, built upon the animal basics of arousal/placidity and fight or flight, are not to be found in nature in the same form as we experience them. We consciously experience all emotions, especially the “higher” ones, through the lens of linguistic interpretation; even the basal emotions most often become transfigured or transmogrified through cultural experience. John McCrone (1991, p. 214) states that “cultural evolution has built extensions out of language to give us our complex human emotions,” and I think he is correct. However, emotionallybased “knowledge” is the defining factor of what Donald (1991) labels as mythic culture, the first cultural stage of humanity after language acquisition but before mass written literacy. Such literacy — with the addition of the experimental method and logical skepticism — ushers in theoretic culture. The latter is apparently where we are now, but it must be pointed out that mythic thinking is still rife amongst us, especially when we use concepts for metaphysical ideas or experiences that have no referents in the real world before us. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 257 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience There is much that should be added to do with the transition from the mythic to the theoretic, but it would be a digression from my focus upon individual stages of development. It may suffice for me to note that the mythic mind is a tribal mind, sympathetically participating with others in the emotional well-being of the community. Here, intersubjectivity is not a theory but a lived reality. One feels with others and intuitively accepts mythic memories and the felt resonance of unseen presences as reality. In a stirring essay, E. Richard Sorenson (1998) calls this communal mind “preconquest consciousness” and describes it in almost paradisial terms as being emotionally and intuitively driven toward the general contentment of the tribe. To this end, changing circumstances may provoke (or invoke) shifting mythic memories or deific interventions; that is, abstract knowledge is in the service of tribal meaning and harmony. After the shock of conquest by European arms and theoretic rationality, however, mythic intersubjectivity shatters and – there being no abstracted, private self (such as we have culturally constructed) into which to retreat – individuals become utterly lost. Sorenson records that both tribal and individual memory radically dissipates. We moderns, on the other hand, use knowledge for its own sake, perhaps as a form of conquest or as the lucre of individual competition. Perhaps we also tend to forget our intersubjective origins and the well being of our tribe. To close this section, let me repeat that to imagine consciousness without a subject to do such imagining is, well, unimaginable. The subject we have each come to know so intimately as “myself” is the result, first, of the primary discovery of proprioception and the subsequent identification with and mimicry of significant others. Language acquisition is the final threshold, which requires the assertion of experience in speech and a consequent sense of subjectivity, narrational practice and its pronouns that make reference to such subjectivity, and the intersubjective dynamic by which we recognize and help create subjects in other persons (and who reflexively affect our own subjectivity). This is our world: a world or persons, culture, and intimate mental relations. At best, it seems able to become a world imbued with unconditional love. At worst, such subjectivity can lead to psychotic isolation. Is there any way out? §6. The Beyond of Language They said, ‘You have a blue guitar, You do not play things as they are.’ The man replied, ‘Things as they are Are changed upon the blue guitar’. (Wallace Stevens, “The Man with the Blue Guitar,” 1954, p. 165) Language creates categories of understanding. For understanding to grow in this way, language must continually complexify, creating ever new categories and subcategories. We soon find ourselves living in a world of language-altered experience attempting to listen beyond the blue guitar for whispers from directly experienced reality. Our language, however, was not created ab nihilo but is instead, as indicated, a reflection of experience back upon itself. Our primary experience in this world is the one ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 258 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience of embodiment, incarnation, so it should be no surprise that an examination of the words, phrases, and idiomatic expressions commonly used betray such embodiment, as George Lakoff (1987) has compellingly shown. The categories of language, according to Lakoff, reveal the mind as arising from the “cognitive unconscious” of embodied experience. With Mark Johnson, Lakoff (Lakoff & Johnson 1999) has even attempted to show that philosophy itself is finally impossible since, when all is said and done, it can only express the body’s own experience in the living environment that exceeds it. But can we know beyond our words? “There is nothing outside the text,” poststructuralist philosopher Jacques Derrida (1976, p. 163) has written and his fans have wriggled ferociously ever since to explain to us that he didn’t really mean what he said. William Haney (1998) would have us believe that Derrida is in fact a sort of trickster-guru whose deconstruction of différancexviii opens the doorway from the enclosure of language to the realms of bliss dreamt of in Eastern religions and the contemplative tradition. Haney’s subtitle is “The Question of Unity” and, in his view, Derrida’s project is to deconstruct “the unity of language and consciousness” while actually inviting “a nonconceptual response similar to that of an aesthetic experience” (Haney, p. 19). What would a nonconceptual response be? Not that such don’t occur, but how could such a nonconceptual response be conceptualized? It can be seen that such suppositions immediately run into contradiction — and contradiction and “the free-play of signifiers” is Derrida’s forte. In other words, reading Derrida is slippery and to impute to him a straightforward intention or message is dangerous, at best. Derrida remains a highly controversial figure both in philosophy and literary studies.xix He is very difficult to read in that his writing frustrates the desire to get to the point. But how could he write in a straightforward, positivist fashion when his whole project is to show that the intended meaning in straightforward, positivist textual manifestoes always contradicts itself? In fact, his whole deconstructive project may be said to reveal that our presumption of meaning-making in speech and writing is illusory. The meaning that we anticipate is always deferred. It is the sense of continuous approach toward a “final saying” that carries us confidently along, but we cannot arrive. We cannot, because such final saying is culturally relative in that it assumes a unique “transcendental signifier.” As an example, for Moslems, Allah is revealed in the Koran. In all speech, the Koran is the mostly unspoken transcendental signifier that gives meaning and value to one half of an oppositional polarity over the other (man over woman, prayer over play, etc.). The terms of language are constructed from fluid pairs of opposites that refer essentially to themselves (Saussure 1988). These are Derrida’s binary oppositions, one of which is always culturally privileged (by its assumed closer relation to the transcendental signifier) and the other, denigrated.xx The deconstruction is the attempt to rend such oppositions apart. What is revealed by such rendering, if anything, cannot be thought or said but it must be a type of consciousness beyond binary thinking or cultural privilege. Derridean deconstruction reveals that language and thought will never lead us to transcultural realizations beyond language and thought. We might be lured in by the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 259 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience structures imposed by our particular culturally determined transcendental signifier and feel we have found absolute knowledge by applying those structures to that which we perceive and analyze (much the way early anthropologists analyzed “primitive” cultures), forgetting that our very perception and analysis are also conditioned by those same cultural structures. It is these previously-assumed-to-be-universal structures that Derrida and the poststructuralists “deconstruct.” Just as Gödel in the field of mathematics showed beyond doubt that nothing can be “shown beyond doubt” within a closed system, so Derrida undermines any sort of finality to linguistic assertions. According to Gödel and, later, Gregory Chaitin, number theory itself must be riddled with randomness. Derrida, the Gödel of language, pulls away the curtain and reveals that no theory or philosophy or science can ever cast the net of language over the whole of existence, or much else, and satisfactorily explain it. It is dangerous to speculate on what Derrida or the other deconstructionists “really mean” since they claim to be deconstructing meaning itself. To encapsulate deconstruction in a nutshell is a contradiction in terms, as John Caputo points out: “Nutshells enclose and encapsulate, shelter and protect, reduce and simplify, while everything in deconstruction is turned toward opening, exposure, expansion, and complexification..., toward releasing unheard-of, undreamt-of possibilities to come, toward cracking nutshells wherever they appear” (1997, p. 31). It is not to be assumed, as some have averred, that Derrida is thus a nihilist. He may only be negative in the sense of a via negativa opening out possibilities. “Deconstruction ... is the endless, bottomless affirmation of the absolutely undeconstructible” (Caputo, p. 42). Derrida did write that his “critique of logocentrism is above all else the search for the ‘other’ and ‘the other of language’” (1984, p. 123). Can anything be assumed about this “other”? Obviously, to assume anything is to create categories and draw experience into language. But oblique clues can be found. Derrida (1992) himself has described the deconstruction as the “experience of the impossible”. From our perspective, raw experience must be an “impossible” unity without substance or form, that is, a great paste of nothingness. But it is not nothing: “If Being is always to be let be, and if to think is to let Being be, then Being is indeed the other of thought” (Derrida 1978, p. 141). Being in itself or experience as such out of which our conscious experience arose is perhaps possible to identify with some attributes of the cultural construct we know as “nature”. We are vaguely — wistfully or uncomfortably — aware of it, but know nothing of it directly: Nor can we know, for knowledge and rationality, as such, are only found within language. Nothing can be said about that which lies beyond language. At this point, at this time, in our genetic or cultural evolution, nothing can be consciously experienced which lies entirely beyond language without losing our humanity and our minds. To know that we are experiencing or what we are experiencing is to draw the emotional sense into the realm of the symbolic, since knowing that or identifying what requires symbolic objectification. Conscious knowing demands a conscious knower who was originally constructed within the symbolic, as I have argued.xxi There is some irony and some regret in the poet Robert Graves (1927/66, p. 45) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 260 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience when he notes the impossibility of our escape from the language-world: There’s a cool web of language winds us in, Retreat from too much joy or too much fear: We grow sea-green at last and coldly die In brininess and volubility. In his view, the expanse of raw experience is no longer available to us. We live adequately without either too much fear or too much joy. Dare we even try to escape the “clutches” of language? What would happen? But if we let our tongues lose self-possession, Throwing off language and its watery clasp Before our death, instead of when death comes, Facing the wide glare of the children’s day, Facing the rose, the dark sky and the drums, We shall go mad no doubt and die that way. In a very real sense, we are all exiles. There is no way back across the bridge we constructed from raw experience into symbol and culture; the linguistic creation of the solo self has burnt it behind us. To recross the crevasse would be to undo the self which knows and remembers. All we have left of the memory of selfless immersion in sensual spontaneity are vague myths about a lost paradise, like the mythical Eden. Maybe this is a good thing, a necessary consequence of intimate community and environmental control. “The organism who speaks has a world and consequently has the task of living in the world” (Percy 1975, p. 204). If we are prisoners, we are prisoners of our own device. If this is so, the dream of awakening the natural unconscious, of escaping to a purer realm before or beneath language is misguided. The view of primordial self-existence derives no doubt from the reification of the sense of self, the assumption that the self exists before language and communicates through language as another cultural tool. If this were so, a few quiet moments on the back porch would be sufficient to escape linguistic enclosure. Lacan (1977) makes it clear that, for whatever reason, it is an error of immense proportion to simply assume that there is a world of experience “out there” or “in here” previous to or beneath or beyond language to which we have access. In fact, the world (not the environment) anticipates and forecloses us. For Lacan, we find ourselves created in the net of language and have no sense whatsoever of the creation or the end of the self we “find” ourselves to be. Birth and death are abstract concepts beyond reality because the self is only experienced between them; yet, as Kerby indicated, this self has had its linguistic creation prepared for it before its biological birth and it will leave linguistic echoes after its biological demise. Lacan deals with biological non-conscious experience with his conception of the “real”. It is not to be confused with “reality” which, for Lacan, is the phantasmatic world ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 261 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience of symbolically reflected (conscious) experience itself. Alan Sheridan, in a translator’s note to Lacan’s Ecrits (1977), explains this important concept this way: The ‘real’ ... stands for what is neither symbolic nor imaginary, and remains foreclosed from the analytic experience, which is an experience of speech. What is prior to the assumption of the symbolic, the real in its ‘raw’ state (in the case of the subject, for instance, the organism and its biological needs), may only be supposed, it is an algebraic x (pp. ix-x). We can’t return; we can only look behind from where we’ve come and imagine what it must be like prelinguistically. But it seems likely that, for us, all that is outside of language is non-conscious experience in a reality that is largely a construction of our biological human sensory and memory systems relating to the things in themselves. We have the sense of directing our behaviour and even our thoughts but the evidence is strong that such top down management is an illusion. The mistake occurs in our present era when we find ourselves already in language and making continuous references to oneself as the creator of language and thought in such common expressions as “I think” and “I feel”. When we say “I think”, we often take it to imply that “I” — me, myself, in here — now am reaching into my vocabulary bag to present to you what I choose to think right now. This is the basic Cartesian error. Thought is built within language and language is the activity of a people. It won’t do to imagine our speaking through a language tool when there could be no speakers without a language in the first place. “‘Ego’ is he who says ‘ego’,” as Benveniste declares. So what does conscious experience actually do? The famous experiments of Benjamin Libet (e.g., 1992), though questioned by some, have persuasively revealed that most conscious decision making takes place an entire half-second after brain activation readings show that subconscious neural processing has begun, indicating the actual decision takes place preconsciously. Subjects attempting to be spontaneous have shortened this time but not obliterated it. This does not necessarily imply that consciousness is epiphenomenal since consciousness, as the apex of experience, may be the guide of long term planning where the “aim” of current behaviour is chosen. Consciousness shades into the unconscious, into non-conscious experience, with vistas of information arriving both preconsciously and departing postconsciously. In this sense, the conscious ego could conceivably be the switching station where trains of thought already on the move arrive, but such trains may be stopped, reversed, or switched to other tracks. New destinations may be chosen; new aims set. Dennett (1991) has famously insisted that consciousness does not even do that, that it is not even real but a mere side effect of language, the intentional fallacy. It seems clear, however, that even side effects have some reality. For Velmans (2009), consciousness has the vital role of making existence, things in themselves, real for us: “It is only when we experience entities, events and processes for ourselves that they become subjectively real. It is through consciousness that we real-ise the world. That, and that alone, is its function” (p. 260). Nørretranders (1998) refers to “I” consciousness as “the user illusion”: Just as we interact with our computers and the internet with a carefully ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 262 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience constructed interface or “command control” for ease of use but remain unaware of the complex programming that goes on behind the scenes (including the programming of the “user-friendly” interface itself), so “I” consciousness dreams it is at the helm of its corporeal behaviour and experience. Could it be that consciousness in itself has been greatly overrated? I think it’s worth considering that the primary role of consciousness is to capture information and to change that information into symbolic formulae. It is a net of knowledge which continually expands. Our world becomes such a flood of information that no individual can contain it. The mind rationalizes and lays claims to immediate experience, time-delaying and channeling it into categories acceptable to consciousness. In that way, it achieves a sense of subjective mastery and, like a bombastic orator, grows inflated with its own rhetoric. Disquietingly, it seems to grow ever more independent, ever more demanding of further information and thus control. Like a bubble formed over an ocean that imagines it is the ocean, consciousness often seems to imagine that it contains, in itself, all experience. We must not forget that no matter how we try to deflect the knowledge, we know that the self is the source of selfishness, the ego of egotism, and vanity or pride of narcissistic inflation. Consciousness has the need to categorize everything, to reduce everything to explanation, so it can be mastered and directed. It is part of my thesis that this is precisely the source of the drive to develop the “science of consciousness” and to explain away sub- or trans-conscious experience itself. I submit that this sundering of self from the bottomless unconscious is apocalyptically dangerous to our species, our planet, and to our experience of the world. The creative source is too all-pervasive ever to be entirely mastered and directed so we simulate such mastery through technological advancement. It is like putting up artificial trees to decorate one’s yard — trees that have neither roots nor life. The yard has sacrificed all that is vital and sacred for material appearances. It looks alive and prospering, but it is neither. PART II: Being and Becoming: An Ontology of Experience §1. The Future of Consciousness and the Origin of Experience For the listener, who listens in the snow, And, nothing himself, beholds Nothing that is not there and the nothing that is. (Wallace Stevens, “The Snowman,” 1954, p. 10) It makes perfect sense to test the winds of the present and speculate on the possible futures of conscious experience, or, as it has become known, consciousness alone, an entity unto itself. Still today, we humans continue to guide our experience within such divergent positions as the scientific, religious, or even none at all, content with apathy. But the road of our human journey is inevitably forking again and the paths chosen are ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 263 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience divergent indeed. The major differences in attitude are found in the opposing lure of concepts such as “nature” and “progress.” Assumptions about the significance of consciousness turn out to be central here. As we lurch into the 21st century, it appears the road of our human journey has come to a crossroads where the choices go in opposite directions: one “back to Nature”, the other forward toward its technological conquest. Those in the human community who take the former road deeply feel our lost connection to all that is natural and note with horror the predictions of the environmental catastrophe that awaits. They yearn for the sensual lost paradise of spontaneously living by instinct and intuition alone, materially impoverished but spiritually awakened. The wisdom of the heart is sought while the knowledge of the mind is distrusted. They feel it is time to dethrone our vaunted singular “I” consciousness, to recognize its hubris and hunger for information accumulation, and find a way to unite atavistically with those preconscious, transpersonal vistas in the immediacy of experience with the ever-experiencing world. Others choose the latter road, however, taking the perspective outlined above that consciousness is a late and unexpected byproduct of unguided, non-conscious evolutionary processes. It is an epiphenomenon whose defence at best is unnecessary. Since the conscious mind is the inevitable result of complex neural processing alone, it has no relation to the natural order based in primary, organic experience. There are no higher yearnings, lower desires, repressed emotions, and there is no unconscious mind. For them, human “I” consciousness does not rest upon a sea of non-conscious experience (consciousness is removable from experience), and intersubjective relations are only for communication from isolated self to self. The way into the future is total commitment to scientific and technological progress that will eventually overcome any current imbalance between population and resources.xxii Many scientific-technological visionaries have gone further and proclaimed that the time fast approaches when we will pass the flame of intelligence onto inorganic processors that will work with so much more speed, power, and efficiency than mere human consciousness could ever master. Such a prospect sounds absurd to many of us and the construction of conscious machines still seems a long way off, but is it impossible? It must be if consciousness is only the apex of experience, connected to all of nature through eons of often haphazard evolutionary eco-relations. In this case, consciousness equates with conscious experience; it is the lighthouse eye emerging from a sea of non-conscious experience. As Dreyfus (1992) argues, consciousness without an unconscious is not possible so computers cannot attain it. We are conscious, and our very existence is rooted in the organic earth, so inorganic mind seems to us a contradiction in terms. But if Dreyfus is wrong — if consciousness is in some way separable from experience — this may not be so. If consciousness can be defined in slightly altered ways — from a third-person perspective, to be sure — it may become much easier to declare its presence. We already have advanced computers that do calculations of such speed and power no human being can compete. Indeed, the previously unbeaten Gary Kasparov was thumped by an implacable chess playing program called Deep Blue in 1997.xxiii This is not ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 264 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience consciousness, yet, but the idea is that with very powerful, very complex parallel processing networks, the computer becomes able to learn rapidly from mistakes, i.e., “experience”. It will adjust its own subsequent processing in response to the results of its first efforts and thus “anticipate” the future. Many programs simulate these things already, of course, but few would be so bold as to insist on their consciousness. Aside from reflexive information processing that learns, there seem to be two more requirements for inorganic consciousness. One is that the processing must have goals or what philosophers might call intentionality. The other is that such processors or processing networks will have to be put into mobile containers so as to interact with their environments and perhaps even each other. This is the serious vision of a whole block of the artificial intelligence community, aided and abetted by functionalist “neurophilosophers” (e.g., Churchland 1987). If consciousness is already nothing but the isolated result of complex processing, it should be transferable to or created upon any complexly processing substrate. Evolution is not avoided as a subject by these prophets, but it is now seen as eminently purposeful: Evolution steadily moves toward more powerful intelligence. Now with the advent of thinking machines, we humans must prepare ourselves for our obsolescence as more intelligent robots take over the running of the world. This proposal was made years ago by science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke and has been propagated by others such as Jastrow (1981), Minsky (1985), Dennett (1991), Paul and Cox (1996), Dyson (1998), and Kurzweil (2000). An interesting feature of many of these authors is their use of terms like “spiritual” or “transcendent” when discussing computerized robot intelligence, which may indicate the old human yearning to escape from the limitations and destiny of incarnation. In this sense, machine consciousness would be the ultimate fulfillment of the dream of egocentric “I” consciousness: escape from all that nasty, limited, and perhaps even sinful organicism. No one has taken this vision of a non-human future to the extremes that MIT robotics researcher Hans Moravec has. In two books, Mind Children (1988) and Robot (1999) with the last of the trilogy on the way, he has envisioned a future in which super robots transcend Earth and use their vast powers to rearrange the very fundament of the cosmos to their own ends. One must wonder just what these “ends” could possibly be! By working at the quantum level, he surmises these vast machines will use sub-atomic energy fields to, in a manner of speaking, recreate the universe in their own image. When confronted with the question of how these super-processing behemoths could actually be conscious without a connection to life, without eons of experience, and without natural processes like emotion and sensitivity, Moravec simply replies that the question makes no sense because we cannot even be sure any one else but our own dear self is conscious in this way. To my mind, this does not answer the question. The super robots would either have conscious experience or no consciousness we would recognize as such at all. Bill Joy (April 2000), cofounder and Chief Scientist of Sun Microsystems and cochair of the presidential commission on the future of IT research, agrees but thinks such advances may indeed be possible. He counsels humanity — for the sake of its own preservation — against pursuing them. For me, the idea of sterile “consciousnesses” grinding along beyond a largely ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 265 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience obsolete Earth in pursuit of their own peculiar ends is unspeakably chilling. If the harrowing life experiences of those who hear only their own internal monologues and have lost all connection to other persons, actual events, and natural emotions are any indication, such robotic super-brains might eventually break down in frenzies of psychopathological destruction. The contrary path cannot hope to include such anti-life ratiocinations since it meanders within the relational dynamics of that which we name life. But resistance to the successes of the past and the successes to come of high technology (or just “hitech” in the wired world) will not be easy. Technology as the offspring of science seems to prove scientific assumptions to be true, again and again. Would robotic minds therefore prove that consciousness really is a computational function? Or will consciousness in a material world remain unexplainable? The former “return to earthly paradise” sounds on the surface much more pleasant. The yearning is universal and certainly very real. But the problem is that no matter how much one plays at being one with nature — doing away with abstract knowledge and excess materiality and living guided only by spontaneous instinct and intuition — such an actual throwback is humanly impossible. As I’ve maintained above, to really lose touch with one’s developed ego consciousness, one would have to recross the symbolic threshold, the bridge that was burnt when we left life as an animal. Perhaps it’s too strong to call this impossible since it happens occasionally in clinical cases of psychotic breakdown or total amnesia in which all cognitive powers have been lost. But these are examples of regression into a “state of nature” with consequent loss of personhood. A glance at such thoroughly regressed cases or those unfortunates reared by wild beasts should convince us that humanity is essentially a noble attainment. Human experience is unique, as Cassirer declares, and, further, the symbolic crossing is indeed final: “Yet there is no remedy against this reversal of the natural order. Man cannot escape from his own achievement.... He has so enveloped himself in linguistic forms, in artistic images, in mythical symbols or religious rites that he cannot see or know anything except by the interposition of this artificial medium” (1944, p. 25). There is no return to the paradise of instinctual impulsion. But there are currently attempts to reconnect to natural rhythms and become attuned to the subtle motions of the unconscious that are much more effective than was Rousseau’s attempt to get back to nature by moving to a patron’s estate in the French countryside. These are creative, not regressive, and include activities from outdoor adventure treks to various sorts of meditation. Such temporary rending of the barrier between conscious experience and experience in itself, i.e., the so-called unconscious, has been done since time immemorial by shamans, seers, and ritual ecstatics, not to mention the more gentle permeation of artists, bards, poets, and musicians.xxiv But, like Theseus entering the labyrinth with his unwinding thread, consciousness is never entirely lost, only its limits expanded. The silent observer remains. It is the deep respect or reverence for the natural modes of non-conscious or pre-conscious experience that allows the space for such paradisial yearnings in the first place. The mystery of consciousness becomes transposed to the mystery — or wonder — of being and its origins. Is the source of experience explainable by science or must it be of non-material spiritual quality? ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 266 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience David Chalmers (1996) has made a name for himself by developing the notion of the Hard Problem of consciousness. As hinted above consciousness itself (qua awareness) has never and probably can never be explained (though the “easy problems” to do with such things as neural correlates, attributes, qualia, or learning may well be). As the reader should by now be aware, I do not feel that it is the conscious quality of experience which is the Hard Problem, the unexplained mystery; it is the fact of experience itself which resists being plumbed.xxv Consciousness, I have suggested, is the name we give to the reflection of experience back upon itself through symbolic interaction and intersubjectivity. But it is not experience in itself. This difference was adroitly noted as far back as 1879 when psycho-neurologist John Tyndall conceptualized the impossible rift: The passage from the physics of the brain to the corresponding facts of consciousness is unthinkable. Granted that a definite thought and a definite molecular action in the brain occur simultaneously; we do not possess the intellectual organ, nor apparently any rudiment of the organ, which would enable us to pass, by a process of reasoning, from one to the other (in Seager 1995, p. 272). The Hard Problem of experience may be the only one that needs, if not an explanation, a response. An explanation would have enormous — surely world-shaking — consequences for our experience of self, each other, and the shaken world itself, it seems to me. On this grand level, the Hard Problem is "Did experience simply evolve from non-experiencing organic interactions?" or "Did experience 'dirempt' or 'focus' from some sort of nonspecific, pre-organic, experiential potentiality that was part of a universe of all possibilities?" On the personal level, the Hard Problem might be phrased as "Was I in some way conscious before my memory of consciousness begins?" or "Was the experiential groundwork for my individual consciousness already present before ‘I' began?" There are, of course, many ways to approach each question, and no final answers appear to be forthcoming. But with some already watching for the necessary obsolescence of humanity, the question requires a response. What else needs to be asked? Aside from those who will insist dualistically that person-consciousness precedes embodiment (that is, the basic form of self-aware consciousness we experience on a daily basis existed as a soul before this life and will exist after it), researches in the multidisciplinary sciences have generally explained the forerunners, appearance, and development of consciousness pretty well through purely evolutionary emergentism. The Hard Problem, then, turns out to be really to do with the limits and ontological assumptions of science. The evolutionary story is, I think, the majority view (though I have left the neuroscience angle out of it). It has been well-told by such luminaries as Scott (1995), Dewart (1989), Humphrey (1992), Ornstein (1991), and McCrone (1999). No "Hard Problem" for them and no need for the arabesques of quantum physics or any other sort of deus ex machina. Consciousness, here, is clearly an evolved product of various forces ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 267 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience in an otherwise non-conscious, non-living universe. The Hard Problem deals with a logical "category error": defining conscious experience from a position outside of it and using terminology embedded in the objective world to explain that which must be always prior — sensation, awareness, subjectivity — to any knowledge of this objective world. But it is more than this. Merely assuming the material, objective world must have preceded awareness does not make it so. The sciences have no way to prove experimentally that some sort of core of nondifferentiated awareness (or even undetectable life) either precedes or coincides with the outer, objective universe. The sciences can only begin with what they have learned is reality: the impersonal, outer, objective, material world. As I suggested above, the material or spatial world itself is a product of perceptual construction that was preceded by nonperceptual experience within the vicissitudes of temporal duration: Experience of time precedes perception of space (or material). I am not saying that some sort of experiencing actually does take place before or beyond or around the life on this planet, but I am saying there is no logical reason to exclude this possibility.xxvi I can only admit I do not know,xxvii but this does seem to me to be the true heart of the Hard Problem: Did consciousness evolve through natural, materialistic processes in an otherwise non-conscious, non-experiencing universe? To answer "yes" is simply to take a stand with unprovable assumptions. Certainly the form of our individualized consciousnesses has become what it is through random mutations and complex evolutionary and cultural adaptations over the years. But what of the background of awareness (Jaynes’ flashlight) that makes such a particular form possible? Is it more logical merely to assume that a non-miraculous creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing, or at least nothing remotely similar) must be the "natural" way of things, or to ask whether or not there might some other hidden dimension not visible to the rationalist eye? I can only add that it is in no way "mystical" to ask such a question. It is, in fact, only logical to do so — a fact recognized by few philosophers or scientists. We seem to be able to account for the all the attributes we can phenomenologically and psychologically list as contents of conscious experience through this emergence from basic biological and cultural evolutionary processes. However, no matter how far back into primitive life-forms we imagine the earliest experience or felt sensation appearing, the leap from totally non-experiential biological interactions has not been satisfactorily explained and it is difficult to see how it could be. If we metaphorize the first appearance of experience as the appearance of light (not uncommon in the literature), the image we have is the sudden, random, and unnecessary emergence of a tiny spark of this preconscious experiencing light within some primitive life form. Take your pick: bacterial, cellular, amoebic, paramecial — or even vertebrate, reptilian, or mammalian. This pinpoint is imagined to evolve slowly or to leap in punctuated bursts into the bright light of consciousness we humans most often experience. But this is to lean on miracles or at least dualistic interventions. No matter how excruciatingly infinitesimal we picture that first point of light to be — no matter how purely mechanical we imagine that first emergence of experience from ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 268 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience non-experiencing biological matter to be — it still must be understood as some sort of miraculous creation since experiencing is so absolutely different in kind from nonexperiencing chemical or biological interactions subject to the laws of physics. As long as we imagine that experience (as such) must involve an experiencer and something experienced, this first appearance of experiential light can only be understood as a supra-rational miracle. It simply does not compute. All these responses to the quandary of the existence of experience in a nonexperiencing material world are without doubt somewhat related. To deal with the enormity of the quandary it should not be surprising that each is a radical leap in its own way. Panpsychism would count among these though it is no longer widely accepted since few will accept that thermostats and stones have minds. A recent and carefully thought out version of this, and one that is much more palatable, suggests that the first appearance of experience among organic modules may simply be a complexification of an already ongoing process of momentary experiencing at the sub-atomic level: an externally non-detectablexxviii added dimension to all that is. This suggestion has been called panexperientialism by David Ray Griffin (in Cobb & Griffin 1977; cf., de Quincey 1994; Griffin 1998) or the more contorted panprotopsychism. Deriving from Whitehead, this view sees all present interactions, including the sub-atomic, as “occasions of experience” that draw past “objective” occasions into a new event or entity that lasts but a moment until it too passes into the past. “The many become one and are increased by one” was Whitehead’s (1978, p. 26) formulation.xxix In this view, time and process with ongoing flashes of experience precede perception of a static, spatial world. Griffin (1998) points out that all things, as such, do not have experience. The idea that rocks, thermostats, etc. are conscious disappears with panpsychism, as normally conceived. This view is more in line with that of some versions of pantheism or perhaps even the holistic anthropic principle. The explicitly Whiteheadian doctrine, clarified and extended by Charles Hartshorne (cf., 1972), states that experience is not created in space but in time. And not only experience: Whitehead’s process view of reality (1978) considers the sciences to err in their view of matter as static, spatial entities. Both experience and matter consist of events in an endless state of becoming. They are, in this view, one thing. Occasions of experience occur only in flashing moments of the ongoing present process. Active, experiencing energy then becomes configured into passive, nonexperiencing matter. In some sense, the whole is experiencing through its monads. Such primary experiencing may even be identifiable with creativity itself, since we are faced with the startling possibility that this whole may actually be creating matter by transforming dynamic occasions of experience into non-experiencing “objective entities,” Whitehead’s term for the bound energy we call matter. Objective entities or events still contain their original creativity but are active only through influencing oncoming experiencing events. The concrescence of the experiencing moment or event draws from a number of these past or objective occasions to have its own moment of experience. Then it, too, enters the past and becomes objective, a part of the many that will be drawn together to become another one. Physically, this can be seen at the subatomic level, where energy fields are drawn together to create a microsecond of experience for, say, an electron. This may be conceptualized as the famous collapse of the state vector or wave-potential into actual particles postulated in the Copenhagen ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 269 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience interpretation of quantum physics, a process that never ends. In this way, it can be seen that the more complex events and entities would have more extended occasions of experience. For inorgania, like rocks, occasions of experience aggregate within but remain disconnected microsecond subatomic events. Plants and animals (including humans) are synchronized cooperatives of such momentary experiences and are called “compound individuals” by Hartshorne. Such individuals are emergent, whole experiencers. Living in organic unity with a shared purpose, beyond symbiosis, the experience of the physical particles is harmonized into the experience of organelles, which is harmonized into the experience of cells, which is harmonized into the experience of organs, and so on up to the individual. A plant or animal draws all these events and entities together to extend occasions of experience into a continuity of experience through time. More complex mammals have memories and anticipations that may lead to some degree of conscious experiencing. Human animals, of course, have symbolic memories and imaginations that are capable of detaching themselves from current sensory input and ranging over space and time far from the present moment. For us, conscious experience most often seems to run in accordance with narrative memory and rational expectation. The self-consciousness we each know and often feel isolated within is a cultural construction working in tandem with the culturally-influenced evolution of the brain. But, according to panexperientialism, it must not be forgotten that such self-consciousness is only possible as the concrescence of innumerable experiencing events and entities that work in organic harmony as the backlit points of awareness that are focused into the light of mind. It should also not be forgotten that such background experience also includes the unconscious (as non-conscious experience). Since panexperientialism implies greater creativity in more complex minds (those that have, through conscious memory, extended their occasions of experience into most of a lifetime), there is no predicting what future mind might be like. A mind that opened to its experiential other — perhaps the other as collective unconscious going “all the way down” — would be a mind awakened or reawakened. A mind that transcended its linguistically restricted linear sense of self-in-time to experience consciously much of what had previously been experienced non-consciously would be less encumbered, less enclosed, and more aware of the underlying orchestra of harmonizing experiences that subtend it. This would be less a position of irrationality than super-rationality since intuition and response would return to their rightful place at the centre of the human journey. The guidance and control of knowledge and information would still be there, but displaced to the side, as it were, and not allowed to deny humanity the fullness of experience. Another position derived from a combination of quantum physics and far from equilibrium thermodynamics sees experience of any sort creating experienced worlds from the chaos or semi-chaos of the unknown and non-experienced — the Kantian “things in themselves.” This implies that the universe before life and consciousness was not "dead" and totally "non-experiencing", but neither was it "alive" and having experiences. It can be thought of as being in a sort of superposition containing all possibilities. In this image, the first, infinitesimal point of light (of experience) was not ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 270 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience really absolutely new within time and space, but was the first particular embodiment of an already present but not yet organized potential continuum of universal experience. To contort the metaphor, the first point of light was but the previously existing dark electromagnetic spectrum made manifest. As mentioned earlier, another suggestion is related to ecopsychology, referring to the creativity of nature itself. The cautious extrapolations of Järvilehto (2000) suggest that the emotional foundations of experience are the expressions of environment-organism relations. The psychotherapist Gendlin (1998) sees the unconscious as consisting largely of the natural life process within each of us. Mathews (1991) asserts that all ecosystems — from smaller ones like cells within our bodies, to bodies, to environmental niches, to Earth, and the universe itself — have “selves” that respond and experience, selves within selves. For her, quasi-Einsteinian geometrodynamics explains the One substance; whether God, Tiamat, or Vishnu, we are of the body of the One, geometrodynamic as it may be.xxx But all this remains speculation. The best that can be logically inferred is the likelihood of the “objective psyche,” as Jung called it and physicist Wolfgang Pauli agreed (cf., Atmanspacher & Primas 1996). The source of consciousness, the collective unconscious, is right here, all around us. Our inner subjectivity rests within the outer, objective world as a formally unmeasurable dimension. But the origin of experience or existence is not discoverable by us beings created within it. Knowledge and nonconscious experiencing are contradictory concepts, and transconscious states of awareness sans egoistic fixation remain, for most of us, larger scale unknowns. Semantic categories of consciousness simply do not apply here, by definition. Consciousness through the self we know well, but it may be that it is our cherished selfconsciousness that isolates us from the world or, in Derrida’s sense, from being-in-itself – the “other” of language. I doubt that we can ever rediscover immediate experience, that is being, from our position “atop” it, looking back on it as the water bubble looks back on the ocean. What, then, could be a new way of knowing beyond or evolving beyond the egocentric perspective of “I” consciousness to an inclusive awareness of “other”? §2. The Hollows of Experience Death of the self in a long, tearless night, All natural shapes blazing unnatural light. (Theodore Roethke, “In a Dark Time”, 1966, p. 231) Throughout this chapter, I have argued that both objective and subjective knowledge are limited. I maintain that objective, scientific knowledge in principle cannot embrace its own beginnings; it cannot account for its own ontological assumptions. Furthermore, I have stated that we are “prisoners of our own device” within the realm of the symbolic. As such, nonsymbolic experience — even of a profound or transformative nature — is unable to produce literal knowledge of itself. It must be re-cognized and re-membered, later or even while actually occurring, and this taints it with the variable contexts of learning, culture, language, and individual psychology. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 271 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience (This situation reconfirms the importance of philology and the preservation of languages that have been marginalized by dominant cultures.) It is curious that a scientist who fully accepts the metaphysics of objective materialism will almost certainly experience consciousness within those parameters. Her worldview will shape her conscious experience. Conversely, her conscious experience will continually confirm her assumptions and beliefs. In the same way, someone who accepts the metaphysics of spirituality will be more likely to consciously experience confirming spiritual encounters. This is not to imply that such experiences are necessarily illusions. Physicist and noted science interpreter F. David Peat has commented on this connection: “An expanded vocabulary is evidence of access to an expanded reality and the need to discriminate subtly different states of consciousness and reflect on encounters with energies and powers of other worlds” (2000, p. 121). The manner of our seeking or believing or accepting this or that as “reality” will accord with our daily sense of existence. The uroboric serpent does indeed twist around and bite its own tail. It is no wonder that such virulent disagreement about consciousness is waged in the intellectual trenches: each one of us “knows” — from both belief and experience — that one’s worldview is true. Such contradictions are not simultaneously sustainable, of course — we can’t all be right. So where, if anywhere, are final answers to be found? What substance is first or what wizard hides behind the sensory curtain? First of all, it must be admitted that any words or images used to indicate transconscious ultimates are projections of culturalpolitical realities and will not answer the question. Any final or subtending Truth must surely be beyond any symbolization of it. The map is indeed not the territory (Korzybski 1993) and all symbols of any sort can literally do is to indicate other symbols, though they may also inspire in unexpected ways.xxxi The question of conscious experience is both an epistemological and an experiential question, but it seems the two are mutually contradictory: Total immersion in present experience excludes the knowing mind, which takes time to know. Conscious knowledge-creation excludes total immersion in the present moment of experience. Drawing pure experience into the web of knowledge creates new knowledge but disguises and alters the experience — or, to be more exact, the memory of the experience. Symbolism both reveals and conceals, as Cassirer (1944) has pointed out: It creates knowledge but conceals the essence of that which is symbolized. Bringing our analytic knowledge-creating mind across the boundary into what should be pure emotional (or transemotional) experience inevitably taints the purity or “rawness” of the experience. The observer cannot permit itself to lose that objectivity by “letting go” into the ecstasy of the moment. Yet there must be something or some process that is foundational to both conscious knowing and overwhelming experience else I could not speak of them in the same sentence. Having said this and drawing together the overall evidence of this chapter, it seems to me that the only conceivable ultimate is creativity itself.xxxii For humans, symbolic interaction makes possible our conscious experiences, which in turn take their cue from background knowledge to advance in novel directions. Errant creativity reveals itself in the adaptations and, even more, the mutations of evolutionary theory. Creativity as such is evident even beyond the organic once we consider the eternal activity within the inorganic as revealed by subatomic physics in this century. Whence this chaotic ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 272 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience dynamism, which is the core of all reality? Creativity begins in the chaos behind all order and in the unbound energy behind all matter. It unites opposites in ways that defeat all words but poetry, myth, or, perhaps, postmodern irony. It is neither objective nor subjective, but makes each possible: “The world is inseparable from the subject, but from a subject which is nothing but a project of the world, and the subject is inseparable from the world, but from a world which the subject itself projects” (Merleau-Ponty 1962, p. 430). Thus, as I proposed above, consciousness is the result of autopoiesis, as is the worldview that is the other part of the cycle of experience and knowledge. This is not easily recognized for we must live from within our worldviews: the beliefs and attitudes that make daily life possible. We nurture their confirmation and find a special place in self-fulfilling narratives for those experiences we regard as having created or affirmed our ontological knowledge. We cannot create creativity, however, and often resist even releasing it. It takes courage to create, as Rollo May has insisted, for certainty and meaning are always put into jeopardy: Creative people, as I see them, are distinguished by the fact that they can live with anxiety, even though a high price may be paid in terms of insecurity, sensitivity, and defenselessness for the gift of the “divine madness,” to borrow the term used by the classical Greeks. They do not run away from non-being, but by encountering and wrestling with it, force it to produce being. They knock on silence for answering music; they pursue meaninglessness until they can force it to mean. (1975, p. 93) Creativity requires a loosening of the purely symbolic grip, a flirtation with elusive pre-conscious experience prior to language. The creative person learns from the active unconscious. The creative phase of initial inspiration dilutes the separation of subject and object, and also does away with the vistas of past and future into which we commonly stretch our daily conscious existence. Humanist psychologist Abraham Maslow has observed: The creative person, in the inspirational phase of the creative furor, loses his past and his future and lives only in the moment. He is all there, totally immersed, fascinated and absorbed in the present, in the current situation, in the here-now, with the matter-in-hand.... This ability to become “lost in the present” seems to be a sine qua non for creativeness of any kind. But also certain prerequisites of creativeness — in whatever realm — somehow have something to do with this ability to become timeless, selfless, outside of space, of society, of history. (1977, p. 58) Eliade explains that poetic and literary creation imply an abolition of time because such creative artists try to alter ordinary language or image by substituting a private and personal language that “tends towards the recovery of the paradisiac, primordial situation; of days when one could create spontaneously, when the past did not exist because there was no consciousness of time, no memory of temporal duration” (1967, p. 36). The spontaneous present is experienced as the return to paradise. The unity of subject ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 273 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience and object and the qualities Maslow cites are among those I described above as being created through the stages of development into personhood through speech assertion, narrativity, and intersubjectivity. Autopoiesis creates the qualities of human conscious experience. Creativity, at least in its inspirational phase — its “furor” — seems largely to undo the most often cautiously preserved social and cultural structures of the conscious “I” or self and unite our activity with a source larger than ourselves or the linguistic environments that shape us. Why such anxiety? From the terminology I have been developing, it is because the creator is not only loosening the grip of the purely symbolic, opening the hermeneutic circle into the spiral of possibility, but she is also opening herself to the pre-creation chaos of nothing at all, what the prophetic Norman O. Brown referred to as: “A pregnant emptiness. Object-loss, world-loss, is the precondition for all creation. Creation is in or out of the void: ex nihilo” (1966, p. 262). The artist of reality allows the sense of the conscious “I” to wither under a hurricane of forces unleashed from the unconscious. Unsettling as it is to permeate the walls of ego-self, we must remember that the symbolic interaction that allowed us to conceive ourselves in the first place also gave us the imagination to access the creative itself. “Our ability to use language means that we have an unlimited creativity inside of us” (Peat 2000, p. 116). What can be more ultimate than the “unlimited”? How much of our lives can be given over to the purely creative without disturbing the contexts needed for daily survival is unknown and will vary amongst cultures and individuals. All we can be certain of is that the well of creativity is deep indeed. “Should we not call it bottomless?” asked Thomas Mann (1934, p. 19) looking into the past for its origins. I am suggesting that the creative impetus may be the ultimate source not only of consciousness or experience but also of all existence, pre-existing all realities as potential. Siler has suggested that we ourselves are evidence of universal creativity even as we are the medium through which new possibilities are further created. He writes that the “universe imparts its creative processes to us. We, in turn, impart our creative processes to the things we create. Our creations reveal the nature of our minds directly and so the universe indirectly. This is the great current of influences that changes our lives in accord with the lifeful changes in the universe” (1990, p. 17). Of course, the view of dynamic processes behind all substance — and infinite potential behind those processes — is not new. Henri Bergson (1911/83) delighted those of his time who were dismayed at the growth of scientific rationality with his demonstration of creative evolution. Whitehead took this even further and made creativity the only ultimate behind and within his process cosmology: “‘Creativity’ is the universal of universals characterizing ultimate matter of fact. It is that ultimate principle by which the many, which are the universe disjunctively, become the one actual occasion, which is the universe conjunctively” (1978, p. 26). As Neumann understood, the ultimate effect of conscious creation is the creation of more consciousness: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 274 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience The nature of creativity in the extra-human as well as in the human realm is always the incorporation, that is, the turning into form [Gestaltwerdung], of what until then had been just formless dynamic energy. The liberating element of creativity for the psyche consists in transforming unformed dynamic energies — which create unrest as drive, urge, or emotion — into that form which possesses a direction toward consciousness; for within this form a vector is urging the comprehension of its inherent luminosity and thus, finally, the increased comprehension of meaning. (1989, p. 41) Many others with serious scientific credentials have found non-mechanical, creative autopoiesis at work behind the unfolding of all that is, from the biological autopoiesis of Maturana and Varela (1987), Ho (1998), and Sheldrake (1995) to the self-organization (Kelso 1997) and strange attractors (Van Eenwyk 1997) of chaos theory and complex dynamic systems to, finally, the ultimate interactive creativity of matter and mind as found in the observer effect of quantum physics (cf., Bohm & Peat 2000; Schrödinger 1992). But the fundamental ontological question remains: What is this creativity that makes autopoiesis, self-organization, or strange attraction possible? And how can we draw more of it into our lives to enrich awareness and add previously unimagined possibilities to our habitually narrow spectrum of reality? What creativity is, in itself, cannot be known since it is not anything at all until it manifests in things or processes of this world. To attempt even to imagine a pre-existent unity, being, or substance without its differentiation and manifestation into a many is an impossibility. Any attribute we can give this unthinkable oneness adds to it and draws it, and our conception, into multiplicity. This “one” would make everything equivalent to nothing since even by imagining “it” existing adds an attribute. Attempts have hesitantly been made to suggest this Ultimate beyond (or infused within) creation with terms like Anaximander’s apeiron, the gnostics’ pleroma, the cosmic conatus of Spinoza, existenz of phenomenologists, or perhaps especially the super-natural God. This is but semantic play, however, since these are and must be conceptions without objective referents. By Kantian syllogism and basic logic, something must at least occasionally manifest within space and time to be recognized as possessing the primary quality of existence. Something must be manifest in — or as — the universe to be any thing. If it is beyond all qualities, especially space and time, it does not exist. We can only be conscious of or know of that which exists. We know and can know nothing objectively of unmanifest creative potential or of a God who is beyond existence. On the other hand, negative conceptions provide a way to indicate potential existence by pointing to what is not. In created spacetime, where indeed can the true void — absolute nothingness or vacuum — be found? Peat (2000) reveals that our conceptual “nothing” is not quite what it linguistically implies, explaining recently discovered dark or vacuum energy: “The vacuum state is the void. It is pure silence. But it is also a bubbling sea in which elementary particles are constantly dancing in and out of existence” (p. 94). Even more unsettling, the potential energy in this void is as unlimited as creativity itself: “It turns out that the energy within one cubic centimeter of the vacuum state would vastly exceed the energy content of our entire universe. … So this void, this nothingness, this cosmic silence, is pure potential” (p. 96). Could it be the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 275 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience ultimate “source” of the creative principle within everything is nothing — that is, the infinite potential energy of the void? In the same way, it would be the most diabolical sort of hubris to insist that the symbolic conceptions of objective knowledge have the power to determine which experiences are real and which are not, or to state flatly that nonconceptual, nonobjective awareness is an impossibility (precisely because it is not literally conceivable). It has been the thrust of my whole argument that certain subjective experiences and states of awareness do occur that are beyond conception and cannot, therefore, become objects of knowledge without becoming drastically particularized and limited. The most profound ontological reality that we can come to know objectively is found in natural processes; and nature at its core is, as physics teaches us, ceaseless dynamism. With Herakleitos (ca. 500 B.C.), I must agree that eternal change is the first and fundamental principle of all that is: “The ordered universe (kosmos), which is the same for all, was not created by any one of the gods or of mankind, but was ever and is and shall be everliving Fire, kindled in measure and quenched in measure” (Frag. 30, in Freeman, 1983, p. 26). This living fire was sometimes called by Herakleitos “change” and other times “strife,” but as that which brings the new, it is always creative. I can only confess that the verbal symbol “creativity” does not do justice to the unfathomable and everlasting dynamism that is not a thing in itself but is, instead, that which makes all things possible. I ask the reader to take the term “creativity” as a metaphor for the unnameable dance of the eternal present and not to test the metaphor against dictionary definitions. Many other metaphors have been attempted. This “everliving fire” suggests the transpersonal ultimacy of desire that is implied by Lacan and other poststructuralists. Such non-substantial, poetically conceivable creativity in itself is indicated by the Derridean reference to the unspeakable “other” of deconstruction. Creativity is further the process behind the drive into novelty that allows for panexperientialism. Finally, I am left with nothing but to indicate the intricate yet profound works of Alfred North Whitehead, especially Process and Reality (1978), to see one map of how ultimate creativity ever-manifests in our turning world. The metaphoric image is one of ultimate dynamism, a non-manifest potentiality that itself manifests first into what we call time. Holonomic autopoiesis is enfolded in every event and entity of the world, as suggested by quantum physicist David Bohm (1980), as well as in all moments of consciousness, as indicated by neuroscientist Karl Pribram (1977). Creativity is the dynamic, eternal now, uncreated in itself yet present in all times and places, as T. S. Eliot (1944a) expressed it, noting that the universal absolute of ...the light is still At the still point of the turning world (p. 18). Yet this still point is Quick now, here, now, always— (p. 20). Nørretranders (1998) sees creative earthly experience overwhelming the “I” consciousness, if we have the courage to let it be. The loss of narcissism may be ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 276 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience frightening because it implies such imponderables as the acceptance of personal death and necessarily feeling attuned to a wounded environment. But Nørretranders makes the point that this is also the way to something far more deeply interfused: “Experience can be more than subliminal,” he writes. “It can be sublime. The sublime experience is the one where we draw on our entire apparatus for experiencing and dare to mark the world as it really is: chaotic and contradictory, dread-provoking and menacing, painful and merry” (p. 415). However, the promise of such deep experiencing is not without pain: Experiencing the state of the planet can generate angst and disquiet, because there are problems on the globe. But perhaps precisely this is the way to getting something done about the problems: Trust that we dare take our own experience seriously is the way to daring to experience what is, even if it is unpleasant. (p. 415) It is not that we must crush self-awareness to become aware of this “sublime,” but we must be able to use it to go beyond itself, as in creative endeavors or certain spiritual practices: “There is no real conflict between consciousness and the sublime, for consciousness is the way to the sublime; discipline is the way to improvisation; stability is the way to surprise; cohesion is the way to openness” (p. 415). The need of the conscious for rationalizing its subconscious routines, if not for actual rationality as a means to understanding, is conspicuous. But this need may have enveloped us over-civilized creatures in these early stages of mental and cultural development in which the sources of life themselves are continually being isolated, fragmented, and “explained away.” The radical continental philosophers seem most able to comment on our predicament but at the cost of appearing obfuscative or (the same thing) oracular. Heidegger, before his time, calls rationalism a “cybernetic frenzy” and claims there is another way to think: “Perhaps there is a thinking which is more sober-minded than the incessant frenzy of rationalization and the intoxicating quality of cybernetics. One might aver that it is precisely this intoxication that is extremely irrational” (1977, p. 391). Derrida too suggests that it is habituated reason which is actually irrational: “But this crisis in which reason is madder than madness — for reason is non-meaning and oblivion — and in which madness is more rational than reason, for it is closer to the wellspring of sense, however silent or murmuring — this crisis has always begun and is interminable” (1978, p. 62). Merleau-Ponty prophesies that awakening to an experiencing world is not a connection we can consciously seek. He enigmatically writes: “If being is to unveil itself, it will be in the face of a transcendence and not an intentionality; it will be brute being caught in the shifting sands, a being that reverts to itself: it will be the sensible hollowing itself out” (1968, p. 210). It hardly needs saying that such hollows must have everything to do with memory, felt memory — the frame of reference that shapes experience. The hollows of experience are not be explained or accessed either through ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 277 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience some objective knowledge-creation or through an atavistic return to animal nature. It seems to me that Merleau-Ponty and even Derrida to some extent suggest that it is within the “hollows” of experience that we can reconnect experientially with primal creativity. Knowledge or interpretation must come after. I have argued above that even experience that is felt to be profound needs to be interpreted to become knowledge, so most experiences within meditation and prayer do not escape from projected expectation and subsequent culturally specific explanation. However, there may be an exception in the type of meditation known as “vispassana,” “mindfulness,” or, simply, “awareness.” In this type of practice no goal is sought, no spiritual struggle is undertaken, no attempt is made to change one’s cognitive routines. However, a space or time is created wherein the sitter merely impassively observes her own mind as it produces the usual cycle of thoughts and images. This alone — this sitting in “the still point of the turning world” looking out — is said to open out a “hollow” within the otherwise light-resistant cycle of habit routines. This is one way to open to the ontology of creative process.xxxiii This is not to abnegate “I” consciousness but to suggest instead another way of being conscious,xxxiv one that allows for both vital experience and for awareness of that experience. Heidegger has declared this “new” consciousness to be “poetic.” We might interpret this as an expressive, creative, spontaneous conscious awareness that analyzes less but responds more attuned with others and the deep emotional chorus of the dynamic environment — a porous “mind” that neither fears nor forecloses emotional trains arriving from world experience but instead uses cultural knowledge to make them manifest: Life as improvisation, as in experimental theatre or with a freestyle jazz combo — attunement without predefined parameters; life as art.xxxv Awareness practice and artistic improvisation are two ways to bring out the creative from the hollows of experience. I would like to suggest that an embodied return to an aesthetic awakening of the senses attuned to the already creative rhythms of our world is another way to discover more life in those fertile hollows. This latter is best associated with wilderness experience where natural rhythms alone still ride the airwaves. This is the position of much environmentalist philosophy such as Abram’s The Spell of the Sensuous (1996) and Sewall’s Sight and Sensibility (1999) and it is suggested by the recent work of Järvilehto (2000). This is eternal return, yes, but it is also to “know the place for the first time” (Eliot 1944b, p. 59) since one is conscious of the returning. It is not an “old” way of being aware,xxxvi as much as such authors suggest its similarity to tribal sorts of awareness. It might be metaphorized as a return to pristine experience but with the added quality of consciousness, a vast “knowing together.” Knowledge, opened to embrace metaphor and expression with culturally specific modes, must be central to such awakening. A true global awareness sometimes seems to be emerging that is, well, something new on Earth. And it is down to earth, as Sewall’s (1999, p. 274) last lines indicate: “My prayer is that we get down, that we get down and dirty.”xxxvii Getting down from the heights of our disembodied material and spiritual aspirations is one more way, maybe the best way, to rediscover the spontaneous present. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 278 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Consciousness beyond self is already all around us, its centre everywhere. What is required is that we find a way through the hollows revealed by a deconstruction of our egocentric self-enclosure and give creative form to the chaotic energy unleashed there. Exposure to such a violent storm may be frightening, a momentary dark night of the soul, but the artist or artists of being must ride this cyclone, creating form. Conscious being manifests all around us in dynamic interplay on the sphere of awareness we call world. Each of us knows this already, on some level, as the bottomless and formless source of memory within the hollows of experience. Of course, we may choose to define consciousness as a biological byproduct isolated from primordial experience and so continue to forge a future guided by the triumph of technology with a humanity “all watched over by machines of loving grace” (Brautigan 1967). As much as the symbolic mode of being conscious allows us to guide our own autopoiesis, I choose instead — and I hope others do, too — a conscious return to the hollows of experience. Each of us knows this place already as the soul’s yearning, as the inchoate memory of différance we must trust even though it is beyond grasp. As Mnemosyne is the mother of the Muses, so such pre-conscious memory of infinite possibility is the mother of creativity. And when one awakens to creative potential, who shall stop the ex-static spread of awe-full wonder? The pure serene of memory in one man— A ripple widening from a single stone Winding around the waters of the world. (Roethke, “The Far Field”, p. 195) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 279 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience ********************************************************************** References Abram, David (1996). The Spell of the Sensuous: Perception and Language in a MoreThan-Human World. New York: Pantheon. Atmanspacher, Harald, & Hans Primas (1996). “The hidden side of Wolfgang Pauli.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 3(2), 112-126. Bachelard, Gaston (1987). On Poetic Imagination and Reverie, trans. with preface and introduction by Colette Gaudin. Dallas: Spring Publications. Beckett, Samuel (1958). The Unnamable. In Three Novels by Samuel Beckett (pp. 289414). New York: Grove Press. Benveniste, Émile (1971). Problems in General Linguistics, trans. Mary Meek. Coral Gables FL: University of Miami Press. Bergson, Henri (1983). Creative Evolution, trans. Arthur Mitchell. Lanham MD: Henry Holt. Original in French 1911. Bohm, David (1980). Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Bohm, David & F. David Peat (2000). Science, Order and Creativity. New York: Routledge. Brautigan, Richard (1967). All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace. San Francisco: Communications Company. Brown, Norman O. (1966). Love’s Body. Berkeley: University of California Press. Caputo, John D., ed. & commentator (1997). Deconstruction in a Nutshell: A Conversation with Jacques Derrida. New York: Fordham University Press. Casey, Edward S. (1987). Remembering: A Phenomenological Study. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Cassirer, Ernst (1944). An Essay on Man. New Haven/London: Yale University Press. Chalmers, David J. (Dec 1995). “The puzzle of conscious experience.” Scientific American 273(6). 80-86. _____ (1996). The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press. Churchland, Patricia Smith (1986). Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of Mind-Brain. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Cobb, John B. Jr. & David Ray Griffin, eds. (1977). Mind in Nature: Essays on the Interface of Science and Philosophy. Washington, DC: University Press of America. Cohen, David (1998). The Secret Language of Mind: A Visual Enquiry into the Mysteries of Consciousness. London: Duncan-Baird. Crites, Stephen (1986). “Storytime: Recollecting the past and projecting the future.” In T. R. Sarbin, ed., The Storied Nature of Human Conduct (pp. 152-197). New York: Praeger. Cytowic, Richard E. (1993). The Man Who Tasted Shapes: A Bizarre Medical Mystery Offers Revolutionary Insights into Emotions, Reasoning, and Consciousness. New York: Warner. Damasio, Antonio (1999). The Feeling of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the Making of Consciousness. New York: Harcourt Brace. Deacon, Terrence (1997). The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 280 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Brain. New York: W. W. Norton. Deikman, Arthur (1996). “ ‘I’ = awareness.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 3(4), 350356. Dennett, Daniel (1991). Consciousness Explained. Boston/Toronto: Little, Brown. de Quincey, Christian (1994). “Consciousness all the way down? An analysis of McGinn's critique of panexperientialism.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 1(2), 217-229. _____ (2000). “Conceiving the inconceivable: Fishing for consciousness with a net of miracles.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 7(4), 67-81. Derrida, Jacques (1976). Of Grammatology, trans. G. Spivak. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. _____ (1978). Writing and Difference, trans. A. Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. _____ (1984). “Deconstruction and the other.” In R. Kearney, ed., Dialogues with Contemporary Continental Thinkers ( pp. 105-126). Manchester: Manchester University Press. _____ (1992). Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice, edited by Drucilla Cornell et al. New York: Routledge. Dewart, Leslie (1989). Evolution and Consciousness: The Role of Speech in the Origin and Development of Human Nature. University of Toronto Press. _____ (May 1998). “Mind, consciousness and transpersonal psychology.” JCS (Journal of Consciousness Studies)-Online Discussion Group. Donald, Merlin (1991). Origins of the Modern Mind: Three Stages in the Evolution of Culture and Cognition. Harvard University Press. Dreyfus, Hubert L. (1992). What Computers Still Can't Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Dyson, George B. (1998). Darwin Among the Machines: The Evolution of Global Intelligence. New York: Helix Books/Perseus Press. Edelman, Gerald M. (1987). Neural Darwinism: The Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. New York: Basic Books. _____ (1989). The Remembered Present: A Biological Theory of Consciousness. New York: Basic Books. _____ (1992). Bright Air, Brilliant Fire: On the Matter of Mind. New York: Basic Books. Edelman, Gerald and Giulio Tononi (2000). A Universe of Consciousness: How Matter Becomes Imagination. New York: Basic Books. Eliade, Mircea (1963). Myth and Reality, trans. Willard R. Trask. New York: Harper & Row. _____ (1967). Myths, Dreams and Mysteries: The Encounter between Contemporary Faiths and Archaic Realities, trans. Philip Mairet. New York: Harper & Row. _____ (1969). The Quest: History and Meaning in Religion. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. _____ (1982). Ordeal by Labyrinth: Conversations with Claude-Henri Rocquet, trans. Derek Coltman. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press. Eliot, T. S. (1944a). “Burnt Norton.” In Four Quartets (pp. 13-20). London: Faber & Faber. _____ (1944b). “Little Gidding.” In Four Quartets (pp. 49-59). London: Faber & Faber. Freeman, Kathleen (1983). Ancilla to the Pre-Socratic Philosophers. Cambridge MA: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 281 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Harvard University Press. Originally published 1948. Gallagher, Shaun (2001), “The practice of mind: Theory, simulation or primary interaction,” Journal of Consciousness Studies, Vol. 8, Nos. 5-7, pp. 83-108. Gendlin, Eugene T. (1998). A Process Model. Online book: <http://www.focusing.org/process.html> ©Eugene T. Gendlin. Globus, Gordon (1995). The Postmodern Brain. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: J. Benjamins. Graves, Robert (1966). “The Cool Web.” In Collected Poems (p. 45). Garden City NY: Doubleday Anchor. Poem originally published 1927. Griffin, David Ray (1998). Unsnarling the World-Knot: Consciousness, Freedom, and the Mind-Body Problem. Berkeley: University of California Press. Haney, William S. II (1998). “Deconstruction and consciousness: The question of unity.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 5(1), 19-33. Hartshorne, Charles (1972). “The compound individual.” In Charles Hartshorne, Whitehead’s Philosophy: Selected Essays, 1935-1970 (pp. 41-61). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Heidegger, Martin (1977). Basic Writings. D. F. Krell, ed. New York: Harper & Row. _____ (1987). An Introduction to Metaphysics, trans. R. Manheim. Yale University Press. First published in German, 1953. Ho, Mae-Wan (1998). The Rainbow and the Worm: The Physics of Organisms. Singapore: World Scientific. Horgan, John (1996). The End of Science: Facing the Limits of Knowledge in the Twilight of the Scientific Age. New York: Broadway Books. Humphrey, Nicholas (1992). A History of the Mind: Evolution and the Birth of Consciousness. New York: Simon & Schuster. Järvilehto, Timo (2000). “Feeling as knowing: Part I. Emotion as reorganization of the organism-environment system”. Consciousness & Emotion 1(2), 53-65. Jastrow, Robert (1981). The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe. New York: Simon & Schuster. Jaynes, Julian (1976). The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Joy, Bill (April 2000). “Why the future doesn’t need us.” Wired 8(04). Kant, Immanuel (1996). Critique of Pure Reason (2nd ed), trans. Werner Pluhar. Indianapolis: Hackett. Original Kritik der reinen Verkunst. Königsberg, 1787. Kelso, J. Scott (1997). Dynamic Patterns: The Self-Organization of Brain and Behavior (Complex Adaptive Systems). Bradford UK: Bradford Books. Kerby, A. P. (1991). Narrative and the Self. Bloomington /Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Klossowski, Pierre (1969). Nietzsche et le cercle vicieux. Paris: Mercure de France. Korzybski, Alfred (1993). Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics. Englewood NJ: International Non-Aristotelian Library/Institute of General Semantics. Kurzweil, Ray (2000). The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence. New York: Penguin. Lacan, Jacques (1977). Ecrits, trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Norton. Lakoff, George (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. University of Chicago Press. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 282 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books. Lao Tsu (1972). Tao Te Ching, trans. Gia-Fu Feng & Jane English. New York: Vintage Books. Originally written ca. 6th century B.C.E. in Chinese. Libet, Benjamin (1992). “Models of Conscious Time and the Experimental Evidence.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 15(2), 213-75. Mann, Thomas (1934). Joseph and his Brothers. New York: Knopf. Maslow, Abraham (1976). The Farther Reaches of Human Nature. New York: Penguin. Mathews, Freya (1991). The Ecological Self. Savage MD: Barnes & Noble. Maturana, Humberto & Francisco Varela (1992). The Tree of Knowledge: The Biological Roots of Human Understanding, trans. Robert Paolucci. Boston: Shambhala. May, Rollo (1975). The Courage to Create. New York: Norton. McCrone, John (1991). The Ape That Spoke: Language and the Evolution of the Human Mind. New York: William Morrow. _____ (1999). Going Inside: A Tour Round a Single Moment of Consciousness. London: Faber & Faber. Mead, George Herbert (1963). Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Charles Morris, ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1962). Phenomenology of Perception, trans. Colin Smith. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. _____ (1968). The Visible and the Invisible, trans. Alphonso Lingis. Evanston IL: Northwestern University Press. _____ (1973). Consciousness and the Acquisition of Language, trans. H. J. Silverman. Evanston IL: Northwestern University Press. Minsky, Marvin (1985). The Society of Mind. New York: Simon & Schuster. Moravec, Hans (1988). Mind Children: The Future of Robot & Human Intelligence. New Haven: Harvard University Press. _____ (1999). Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind. London/New York: Oxford University Press. Morris, William, ed. (1982). The Houghton Mifflin Canadian Dictionary of the English Language. Markham ON: Houghton Mifflin Canada. Moussaieff Masson, Jeffrey & McCarthy, Susan (1995). When Elephants Weep: The Emotional Lives of Animals. New York: Delta/Dell. Müller, Herbert (1997). “Is the mind real?” Karl Jaspers Forum [electronic journal online], <http://www.kjf.ca/1-TA12.htm> (archived). Nagel, Thomas (1974). “What is it like to be a bat?” Philosophical Review 83 (4), 43550. _____ (1986). The View from Nowhere. New York/London: Oxford University Press. _____ (1987). What Does It All Mean? New York/London: Oxford University Press. Neumann, Erich (1989). The Place of Creation: Six Essays. Bollingen Series LXI, Vol 3. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Essays originally presented as lectures at the Eranos conferences, 1952-60. Nixon, Gregory (1999). “A ‘hermeneutic objection’: Language and the inner View.” In Francisco J. Varela and Jonathan Shear, eds., The View from Within: FirstPerson Approaches to the Study of Consciousness (pp. 257-267). London: Imprint Academic. Nørretranders, Tor (1998). The User Illusion: Cutting Consciousness Down to Size, trans. Jonathan Sydenham. New York: Viking Penguin. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 283 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Ornstein, Robert (1991). The Evolution of Consciousness. New York: Prentice Hall. Paul, Gregory S. & Cox, Earl (1996). Beyond Humanity: Cyberevolution and Future Minds. Charles River Media. Peat, F. David (2000). The Blackwinged Night: Creativity in Nature and Mind. Cambridge MA: Perseus/Helix. Percy, Walker (1975). The Message in the Bottle: How Queer Man is, How Queer Language is, and What One Has To Do with the Other. New York: Noonday. Pribram, Karl (1977). Languages of the Brain. Monterey CA: Wadsworth. Ricoeur, Paul (1984-8). Time and Narrative, 3 vols., trans. K. McLaughlin & D. Pellauer. University of Chicago Press. Richardson, Miles (1989). “Point of view in anthropological discourse: The ethnographer as Gilgamesh.” In P. A. Dennis & W. Aycock, eds., Literature and Anthropology. Lubbock: Texas Tech University. Roethke, Theodore (1966). The Collected Poems of Theodore Roethke. New York: Anchor Books/Doubleday. Rosenfield, Israel (1993). The Strange, Familiar, and Forgotten: An Anatomy of Consciousness. New York: Vintage Books. Sacks, Oliver (1985). The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat. New York: Harper & Row. Saussure, Ferdinand de (1988). Course in General Linguistics, trans. Roy Harris. Charles Bally & Albert Sechehaye, commentators. New York: Philosophical Library. First published in French 1916. Schrödinger, Ernst (1992). What is Life? / Mind and Matter. New York/Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Scott, Alwyn (1995). Stairway to the Mind: The Controversial New Science of Consciousness. New York: Copernicus. Seager, William (1995). “Consciousness, information and panpsychism.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 2(3), 272-288. Sewall, Laura (1999). Sight and Sensibility: The Ecopsychology of Perception. Tarcher/Putnam. Sheldrake, Rupert (1995). The Presence of the Past: Morphic Resonance and the Habits of Nature. Rochester VT: Park Street. Siler, Todd (1990). Breaking the Mind Barrier: The Artscience of Neurocosmology. New York: Simon & Schuster. Sorenson, E. Richard (1998). “Pre-conquest consciousness.” In H. Wautischer, ed., Tribal Epistemologies: Essays in the Philosophy of Anthropology (pp. 79-115). Aldershot UK: Avebury. Stevens, Wallace (1954). The Collected Poems. New York: Vintage. Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre (1959). The Phenomenon of Man. London: William Collins Sons. Tyndall, John (1879). Fragments of Science: A Series of Detached Essays. Addresses and Reviews. London: Longmans. Cited in Seager, 1995, p. 272. Van Eenwyk, John R. (1997). Archetypes and Strange Attractors: The Chaotic World of Symbols. Toronto: Inner City Books. Varela, Francisco, Eva Thompson, & Eleanor Rosch (1991). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Velmans, Max (2009). Understanding Consciousness (2nd ed.). London & Philadelphia: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 284 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Originally published in Russia, 1934. Whitehead, Alfred North (1967). Adventures of Ideas. New York: MacMillan. Original 1933. _____ (1968). Modes of Thought. New York: MacMillan. Original 1938. _____ (1978). Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology. Corrected edition. D. R. Griffin & D. W. Sherburne, eds., New York: Free Press. Originally published 1929. Zahavi, Dan (2007). “Self and other: The limits of narrative understanding” (pp. 179291). In D. D. Hutto, ed., Narrative and Understanding Persons. Royal Institute of Philosophy. Supplement 60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Zebrowski, George (June 1994). “Is science rational?” Omni, pp. 45-53 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 285 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience ENDNOTES i “Nematodes are the most numerous multicellular animals on earth. A handful of dirt will contain thousands of the microscopic worms, many of them parasites of insects, plants or animals. Free-living species are abundant, including nematodes that feed on bacteria, fungi, and other nematodes, yet the vast majority of species encountered are poorly understood biologically. There are nearly 20,000 described species classified in the phylum Nemata. Nematodes are structurally simple organisms. Adult nematodes are comprised of approximately 1,000 somatic cells, and potentially hundreds of cells associated with the reproductive system. Nematodes have been characterized as a tube within a tube; referring to the alimentary canal which extends from the mouth on the anterior end, to the anus located near the tail. Nematodes possess digestive, nervous, excretory, and reproductive systems, but lack a discrete circulatory or respiratory system. In size they range from 0.3 mm to over 8 meters.” (What is a Nematode?) ii Prehension is A. N. Whitehead’s term for experience that “can include, as part of its own essence, any other entity” (1967, p. 234). Such primary experience is unlike conscious cognition in that neither objective perception nor any distinction between self and other (subject and object) necessarily takes place. Initially what is prehended is change (time) not substance or things (space), and such occasionally prehended time is the organism’s entire reality. iii More like a thick bush, spreading into complexity, than a ladder of progress. iv This notion of a rudimentary eco-psyche has been seriously explored from a number of approaches, including the perceptual-aesthetic conservationism of David Abram (1993) and Laura Sewall (1999), the organization-emotion approach of Timo Järvilehto (2000), the primacy of life-process in Eugene Gendlin (1998), and even the metaphysical in Freya Mathews (1991). We may anthropomorphically err by conceiving of experience as only occurring within individual organisms. v It may be pertinent to note that the last sessions at "Tucson 2000: Toward a Science of Consciousness" were about the need to go in a direction promising practical benefits and potential fiscal return so as to encourage investment, grants, and other benefits to the researchers in the field. vi The narrativist school of philosophy and literary theory has persuasively argued that the conception of time is itself an aspect of the linearity of narrative that requires a beginning, middle, and end. See, for example, Paul Ricoeur, Time and Narrative (1984-8). vii ”Truth is by nature the offspring of dialectic thought. It cannot be gained, therefore, except through a constant cooperation of the subjects in mutual interrogation and reply. It is not therefore like an empirical object; it must be understood as the outgrowth of a social act” (Cassirer, 1944, p. 5). viii When shamanism, mysticism, paranormality, or chemically altered states are considered, potential conscious experience may be understood as very broad and deep indeed. ix I owe the inspiration for this sentence to Herbert Müller (1997). x This is not to impugn the personhood of scientists themselves but to note the ideal of the scientific worldview. Many scientists are religious or otherwise spiritual and many seriously appreciate the effects of their own subjectivity. xi Since I defined consciousness above as reflective knowing, including knowing that one is experiencing, I will employ the term “awareness” here for all possible levels of experience from preconscious to unitive conscious states. xii The Journal of Consciousness Studies and others have called for a multidisciplinary but still scientific investigation of conscious experience. It has made the optimistic suggestion that conscious experience may at last be rationally understood and explained. The very language of such a suggestion is rife with cultural assumption. Rationality must in some way be seen as antecedent to conscious experience and not a product of it if consciousness is to be so understood. xiii Edelman (1992) does not deny that a ToE is possible, “But a ‘theory of everything’ will certainly have to include both a theory of the mind and a fuller theory of the observer” (p. 208). xiv This was recognized by Percy in 1975: “Every conscious perception is in the nature of a recognition, a pairing, which is to say that the object is recognized as being what it is. To amend the phenomenologist: It is not enough to say that one is conscious of something; one is also conscious of something as being something” (pp. 272-3). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 286 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience xv It has been suggested elsewhere (Eliade, 1963) that such times were sacred times; the speaking on these occasions was formal and ritualized and the lack of individuality and undeveloped self-awareness led speakers to communicate not for utilitarian purposes or for themselves, but from and for their cultural unit. When speech was spoken, it was with the “voice” of the culture, experienced as divine in origin. Jaynes (1976) considers early inner speech also to have been experienced as the voice of the gods. xvi In this perspective, Arthur Deikman’s “‘I’ = Awareness” (1996), is simply mistaken. It is, in fact, the “I” which changes experiential awareness into narrative consciousness and prevents the reunification of immediate sensory experience with consciousness. xvii This is the opposite of the isolated Cartesian subject assumed by psychologists and philosophers who argue over which form of the “theory of mind” (simulation-theory or theory-theory) the infant or toddler uses to infer minds like its own in others. Instead such notions as primary intersubjectivity (Gallagher 2001) begin with a self relational before it learns to be isolated. I cannot conceive of a relational entity before it is an entity so I agree with Lacan (above) and later phenomenologists like Merleau-Ponty (1973) in taking the step of assuming the initial identification with the primary caregiver(s) — obvious in the case of the fetus in the mother but continuing for the infant. With the sense of limited embodiment, the journey toward the private self begins. xviii Derrida’s neologism to metaphorize our existence, suggesting both the power of words to endlessly differentiate and that full disclosure/enclosure of meaning is always deferred or postponed. xix Derrida was nominated to receive an honorary degree from Cambridge University in 1992 but such a protest arose that it had to be voted on by the Cambridge dons, passing 336 to 204. xx The etymology of the very term “denigrate” reveals our privileging of light over darkness. xxi This perspective has been resisted almost as much as it has been misunderstood. There are no things outside the text of language: As I have indicated in the section above, “The Subject,” objects only come to exist, as such, with their naming and recognition. Non- or preconscious experience does not take place in world of objects but only of actions and reactions, sensations and emotions. This is true of situations even where language itself seems to be completely lost. One example is someone too involved in critical action even to think, such as the sailor friend who told of rapidly and “mindlessly” making adjustments to his craft to stay afloat during a storm at sea. Another example is temporary language anosognosia, during episodes of which a scientist correspondent claimed he can neither understand nor speak words. Once he had to do a little dance to assure his wife that he was okay. In both of these cases, it should be easy to see that neither the life-saving responses of the sailor nor the communicative performance of the scientist would have been possible if they had not already crossed the threshold of the symbolic. The actions of the sailor and self-awareness of the scientist were originally learned through symbolic interaction though they had by now passed into subconscious schemata. The scientist’s little dance was itself symbolic. I should add that, yes, much of a powerfully deep nature is non-consciously experienced beyond the realm of the symbolic; however, this is inner experiencing, unshared with others, primarily unremembered, and without literal reference in the outer world of recordable events. So here again there is indeed raw experience beyond language, outside of the text, but such experience in itself is doomed to disappear into oblivion as soon as it ceases — without becoming conscious. To be remembered the experience must be made into an object of memory, that is, drawn into the contexts of the symbolic: memory, language, culture, and psychological projection (cf., Nixon 1999). This certainly applies in the realm of experiences we term spiritual. Anyone who has felt personally dissolved into such a rapture cannot doubt its reality, but it is a reality without substance or temporality until we objectify it. The great religious historian, Mircea Eliade (1969, p. 19), no stranger to direct experience of the sacred, asserts that “there is no such thing as a ‘pure’ religious fact. Such a fact is always also a historical, sociological, cultural, and psychological fact, to name only the most important contexts.” Even our labels like “spiritual” and “sacred” draw distinctions that are not there when there is only experience. “It is impossible to imagine how consciousness could appear without conferring a meaning on man’s impulses and experiences. Consciousness of a real and meaningful world is intimately linked with the discovery of the sacred,” adds Eliade (1982, p. 153). Beyond this are the varied extraordinary claims that must be impossible within the ontology of scientific realism. These include such things as NDEs (near death experiences), OBEs (out of body experiences), and on up to widespread claims of being abducted and held for experimentation within alien spaceships. The people who have had such experiences often are utterly ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 287 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience sincere so one cannot doubt that they experienced something; however, no such experience has been veridically verified to the extent that it has been accepted as observable, historical fact. All they had to apply to their inexplicable moments are the contexts from the real daily world of space and time and these, it seems, just won’t do. A good example is those who claim to have re-experienced their actual physical birth (despite the lack of development of the brain’s memory capacity at this time) during “rebirthing” regression. They could well have undergone the profound initiatory pattern of deathtransition-rebirth that Eliade regards as universal to human experience; but did they in fact psychically return to experience again their literal discharge from the womb of their mothers? It seems much more likely that such is a rationalization of the highly-charged emotions of a transformative experience. It is this sort of after-the-fact interpretation that draws non-conscious experience within the symbolic realm of human conscious reality. xxii This viewpoint is more widespread than the public news media note. See, for example, any issue of 21st Century Science & Technology, or sit in on board meetings of any expanding technological corporation. xxiii Kasparov declared he felt an “intelligence” at work against him. We must assume Deep Blue remained as utterly indifferent to this outcome as Kasparov was utterly frustrated. xxiv I need to emphasize that such experiential “permeation” of the presymbolic barrier can only produce knowledge and demonstrable effects with symbolic interpretation. xxv Chalmers seemed to suggest this in one article: “The really hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience” (Dec 1995, p. 80). xxvi Christian de Quincey (2000) elucidated this problem well by boldly suggesting the universe experiences itself through the relational dynamics of its monads, including us. In some ineffable sense the Big One is itself "alive" in its totality and we are of it. xxvii As I have argued, experience as experience can only be experienced. To know experience is to undertake the conscious act of knowing — to make experience conscious, symbolized, and no longer “pure” experience. xxviii From the outside. xxix Aside from the notion of momentary experience, Whitehead has proved to be astonishingly prescient in anticipating the discoveries of the quantum physics. See. e.g., Stapp, 1979. xxx Geometrodynamics envisions the universe as one solid block, so to speak, in which all space and all time already exist. This is the very opposite of a universe of creative unfolding, as I am here presenting. xxxi Gaston Bachelard remonstrates, “How unjust is the criticism which sees nothing in language but an ossification of internal experience! Just the contrary: language is always somewhat ahead of our thoughts, somewhat more seething than our love. It is the beautiful function of human rashness, the dynamic boast of the will; it is what exaggerates power....Without this exaggeration, life cannot develop. In all circumstances, life takes too much in order that thought may have enough. The will must imagine too much in order to realize enough” (1987, p. 30). xxxii Having said this – and breaking the taboo of the language philosophers to even mention an “ultimate” – I must admit to appearing to valorize one side of a binary opposition, the other denigrated side being stasis, order, control. As Derrida warned us (above), a word represents only the more valued half of a polarized pair and so can never indicate ultimacy or being-in-itself. However, I would like to plead for creativity as a process, not an independent force, that begins in potentials within chaos and ends in order and harmony. The dependable work of carpenters, electricians, and plumbers are as much a part of the architectural vision as are the first “inspired” sketches — and the building so constructed is expected to endure as statically as possible. xxxiii I confess I am taking the word of others to some degree. My own experiences with awareness meditation have been limited so I can claim little personal knowledge of such sitting. An excellent short list of sources for the practice is found in Varela, Thompson, & Rosch, 1996, Appendix C, pp. 259-60. xxxiv Or being-consciousness: a pervasive, immediate awareness — and awe — of existence. xxxv If this sounds just too saccharine, be reminded that anyone who has done theatric improv or played in a freestyle jazz combo knows how keenly competitive such play can be. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 288 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 234-288 Nixon, G. M. Hollows of Experience xxxvi Though it could be argued that Jung’s concept of individuation is a forerunner. xxxvii Ancient Lao Tsu advised staying with terra firma too: “Mask your brightness,/Be at one with dusty Earth” (1972, chap. 56, lines 7-8). © Gregory M. Nixon, 2010 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 888 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part II) Editorial Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research Huping Hu* & Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT The issues surrounding quantum brain/mind/consciousness research are both confusing and complex. If one can manage to grasp these issues, one may find that the past of this field has been fruitful and its future is indeed very promising. The current landscape and past achievements in this field have already been discussed by our colleagues as pointed herein. This editorial mainly attempts to classify/clarify some of the major issues and discuss what are lying ahead. Whatever difficulties may still remain, recent experimental results by several groups including those of the authors’ own make it very clear that quantum effects play important roles in brain functions despite of the denials and suspicions of the naysayer and skeptics. Key Words: quantum brain, quantum mind, quantum consciousness, research, theoretical, experimental, current landscape, future direction. 1. The Current Landscape The current landscape of quantum mind/brain research may be likened as the “Wild West” of old America. It is filled with a few larger-than-life characters whose theories and perceived/self-claimed authorities are attacked from the outside by the guards of the classical world and challenged within by competing researchers armed with their own theories/speculations and in some cases experimental results. Also notable are the new electronic journals organized and run by different groups which have created new outlets for publishing new thoughts and research results otherwise maybe being rejected or suppressed. Among these journals are NeuroQuantology (http://neuroquantoloyg.com) run by Sultan Tarlaci since 2003, Mind and Matter (http://mindmatter.de) run by Harald Atmanspacher since 2003, AntiMatters (http://anti-matters.org) run by Ulrich J Mohrhoff since 2007 and Quantum Biosystems (http://www.quantumbiosystems.org) run by Massimo Pregnolato since 2007. The latest is the Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research (JCER http://jcer.com) run by the herein authors since beginning of this year. *Corresponding author: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D. Address: QuantumDream, Inc., P.O. Box 267, Stony Brook, NY 11790, USA. E-mail: hupinghu@quantumbrain.org ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 889 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research In two recent articles entitled respectively “Why We Need Quantum Physics for Cognitive Neuroscience (Tarlaci, 2010a)” and “A Historical View of the Relation Between Quantum Mechanics and the Brain (Tarlaci, 2010b)”, Tarlaci, have surveyed the field of quantum brain/mind/consciousness research with respect to why quantum mechanics is needed and what have been done in the field since early 20th century. Massimo Pregnolato has also written a guest editorial entitled “Time for Quantum Consciousness” for this issue of JCER assessing the field and discussing the future of quantum brain/mind research and the broader implications associated with quantum consciousness. In addition, AntonellaVannini (2008) in an article entitled “Quantum Models of Consciousness” summarized many of the existing theories and attempted a classification of the theories he mentioned. The herein authors agree to large extent with the surveys and assessments of their colleagues Tarlaci, Pregnolato and Vannini and readers are encouraged to study all these four articles to learn about this field. The issues surrounding quantum brain/mind/consciousness research are both confusing and complex. If one can manage to grasp these issues, one may find that the past of this field has been fruitful and its future is indeed very promising. This editorial mainly attempts to classify and/or clarify some of the major issues and discuss what are lying ahead. 2. Definitions & Classifications of Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research The descriptive phrase for this field is quantum brain, quantum mind or quantum consciousness. As far as authors know, no one has attempted to make clear distinctions among these phrases. Therefore, for all practical purposes, they mean the same field of research. So what is quantum mind/brain/consciousness research then? Well, it may mean different things to different people based on their particular backgrounds and perhaps “stages of enlightenment.” In the narrow sense, it means: Definition I: The theoretical and experimental study of whether a particular quantum effect such as quantum coherence or quantum entanglement in a particular neural location and/or substrate is occurring and, if occurring, whether it is involved in a particular brain/cognitive function (let’s call this the “Narrow Problem” of quantum mind research). In the broad sense, it also includes: Definition II: The theoretical and experimental study of the foundations of and the relationships and/or connections between quantum mechanics and consciousness such as the measurement problem (let’s call this the “Broad Problem” of quantum mind research). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 890 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research The confusions and complexities starts with areas covered under Definition II since neither the foundational questions (the mysteries) of quantum mechanics nor those of consciousness are well settled. Indeed, there may be as many quantum physicists as interpretations and as many consciousness theorists as consciousness theories. Physicist Richard Feynman (1967) once lamented that “I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics.” Philosopher David Chalmers (1995) once suggested that the reason for people wanting to connect consciousness with quantum mechanics is that “consciousness is mysterious and quantum mechanics is mysterious, so maybe the two mysteries have a common source.” A. Classification based on ontology From the perspective of ontology there are three categories of quantum brain/mind theories: O1: Materialistic theories which implicitly or explicitly treat consciousness as various types of emergent phenomena of the material world. O2: Dualistic theories which implicitly or explicitly treat consciousness as various types of mind-matter interactions. O3: Panpsychism (or pan-consciousness) based theories which treat consciousness as the foundation of reality. B. Classification based on testability From the perspective of testability there are six types of quantum brain/mind/consciousness theories: T1: Theories which involve concrete entities/variables and are testable with currently available technologies. T2: Theories which involve abstract entities/variables but contains predictions testable with currently available technologies. T3: Theories which involve concrete entities/variables and may become testable with future technologies. T4: Theories which involve abstract entities/variables but contain predictions maybe becoming testable with future technologies. T5: Theories which involve concrete entities/variables but in principle may not be testable. T6: Theories which involve abstract entities/variables and contain/make no testable predictions. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 891 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research 3. Tentative Classification of Some Existing Theories (Note: it is incomplete and dates and classification may not be accurate) plus a List of Some Existing Books Table 1 Some Early Thoughts 19021935 1925 1932 1939 Niels Bohr Copenhagen interpretation II-O2-T6 Alfred Lotka John Von Neumann Fritz London & Edmond Bauer Classical and non-classical consciousness Interactive Dualism Consciousness creates reality II-O3-T6 II-O2-T2,4 II-O3-T4 Table 2 Some Recent Theories 1967 1968 1970 1971 1980 1986 1989 1989 1991 1991 1992 1993 1998 2000 2000 2002 L.M. Riccicardi & H. Umezawa Herbert Frölich Ewan H. Walker Karl Pribram David Bohm John Eccles Ian Marshall Chris King Brian Josephson & F. Pallikari-Viras Michael Lockwood Stuart Hameroff & Roger Penrose Henry Stapp Matti Pitkänen Giuseppe Vitiello Alex Kaivarainen Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu Quantum Field Theory I-O1-T4,6 Long range coherence and energy storage Electron tunneling in synapses Holonomic model of mind Wholeness and the implicate order Quantum tunneling Bose-Einstein condensate Dual-Time Supercausality Biological utilisation of quantum non-locality I-O1-T3,5 I-O1-T3,5 I-O1-T2 II-O2-T4,6 I-O1-T3,5 I-O1-T3,5 II-O2-T4,6 II-O2-T4 Mind, Brain and the Quantum Objective reduction in microtubules II-O1-T4,6 II-O1-T3,5 Mind Matter and Quantum Mechanics TGD inspired theory of consciousness The dissipative brain Hierarchic model of consciousness Spin-mediated consciousness theory II-O2-T4,6 II-O1-T4,6 I-O1-T4,6 I-O1-T4,6 II-O3-T1,3 Table 3 Some Related Books (Publishers are given) 1975 1985 1987 1989 1991 1991 1991 1992 1993 1993 Fritjof Capra Nick Herbert F. David Peat Roger Penrose Michael Lockwood Michael Talbot Danah Zohar Paul Davies Amit Goswami D. Bohm & B. Hiley ISSN: 2153-8212 The Tao of Physics Quantum Reality Synchronicity The Emperor’s New Mind Mind, Brain and the Quantum The Holographic Universe The Quantum Self The Mind of God The Self-Aware Universe The Undivided Universe Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Shambhala Anchor Bantam Oxford Uni. Press Blackwell Pub Harper Perennial Harper Perennial Simon & Schuster Tarcher Routledge JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 892 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research 1994 1995 2002 2006 2006 2007 2008 2008 2010 Roger Penrose Fred A. Wolf Jeffrey Satinover Bruce Rosenblum & Fred Kuttner Dean Radin Henry P. Stapp Gregg Braden Ervin Laszlo Graham Smetham Shadows of the Mind The Dreaming Universe The Quantum Brain Quantum Enigma - Physics Encounters Consciousness Entangled Minds Mindful Universe The Divine Matrix Quantum Shift in the Global Brain Quantum Buddhism Oxford Uni. Press Touchstone Wiley Oxford University Press Paraview Pocket Books Springer Hay House Inner Traditions Shunyata Press 4. Experimental Results Supporting Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness There are several types of experimental results supporting and/or being explainable based on quantum brain/mind/consciousness (the list is not complete): 1. Parapsychology: e.g., Rupert Sheldrake (see 2009), Dean Radin (see 2006). 2. Homeopathy (water memory): e.g., Jacques Benveniste (see Davenas et. al, 1988). 3. Remote effect of Human Intention: e.g., Robert Jahn & Brenna Dunne (see 2009), William Tiller (see 2007), Masaru Emoto? (see 2005), Uri Geller? (see 1999), various Qigong effects. 4. Non-local corrections of EEG: e.g., J. Grinberg-Zylberbaum (1987), Jiri Wackermann (see, 2004). 5. Sensed presence and altered state of consciousness under magnetic stimulations: Persinger e.t. al. (see, 1993, 2010a). 5. Non-local corrections of MRI signals: e.g., Jeanne Achterberg (2005). 6. Non-local correlations of EEG under magnetic stimulations: Michael Persinger, et. al.(2003, 2010b). 7. Non-local pattern in cognitive functions: e.g., Diederik Aerts et. al. (see 2000), Elio Conte et. al.(2003, 2010). 8. Light/environment-induced biological effects: e.g., Peter Gariaev (see, 1991), Bevan Reid (1989). 9. Consciousness collapse wave function: e.g., Dick J. Bierman (2003), also see Mark Germine? (1998). 10. Non-local effects of chemical substances on the Brain: Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu (2006a-c). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 893 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research 11. Non-local chemical, thermal and gravitational effects: Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu (2006d, 2007a-b). 12. Optical illusions: Efstratios Manousakis? (2007), Elio Conte et. al.(2009). 5. Tentative Conclusions from Existing Theories & Experimental Results Based on the above list of existing theories and summary of experimental results, several tentative conclusions may be drawn as follows: (1) Materialistic theories alone without enlargement of ontology to O2 or O3 are likely invalid. (2) Quantum effects play important roles in brain and/or cognitive functions (that is, in consciousness). (3) Consciousness likely play important roles in quantum effects such as in wave function collapse. (4) Consciousness is likely outside spacetime and is the foundation of reality. (5) Unity of Mind (the binding problem) is likely achieved through quantum entanglement beyond the current forms of quantum mechanics. (6) Conscious intentions likely have physical effects on matter. (7) Neural substrates of consciousness (mind-pixels) are possibly nuclear/electronic spins. 6. Future Tasks/Directions of Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research A. Most urgent and crucial are independent verifications/replications of existing experimental results. B. Design and implement additional experiments to find out: - Where are neural substrates of consciousness (“NCCs”) located at the cellular, molecular and sub-molecular levels? - What are the NCCs: nuclear spin, Electron spin, and/or other entities in the brain such as ions? - What are the roles of biophotons emitted from the brain in consciousness? (The authors’ own suggestions are: (1) Formation of quantum entanglement in the brain to achieve binding; (2) Transmission of quantum information from location to location in the brain; (3) Formation of collective consciousness ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 894 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research (entangled mind as Radin would say) through quantum entanglement and nonlocal information sharing. C. Improve existing theories (develop new ones, if necessary) and do even more experiments to find out: - How NCCs interact with the action potentials? In other word, how action potentials input information into NCCs and how NCCs associated with free will (human intention) output information into action potentials? - How NCCs are connected to qualia and/or quantum information associated with qualia? - How qualia are accommodated in O2/O3 type of theories? -Whether O2 or O3 types of theories are the correct theories or more compete theories; - How free will operate in O2/O3 types of theories? Whatever difficulties may still remain, recent experimental results by several groups including those of the authors’ own make it very clear that quantum effects play important roles in brain functions despite of the denials and suspicions of the naysayer and skeptics. REFERENCE Achterberg, J. et. al., Evidence for correlations between distant intentionality and brain function in recipients: A functional magnetic resonance imaging analysis. J. Altertaive & Complimentary Med., 2005; 11 (6): 965–971. Aerts, D. et. al. The violation of bell inequalities in the macroworld. Foundations of Physics, 2000; 30(9): 1387-1414. Bierman, J. B. Does consciousness collapse the wave-packet? Mind & Matter, 2003; 1(1): 45-77 Bohm, D. Wholeness and the Implicate Order, 1980. Routledge, Oxford. Bohr, N. as described in McEvoy, P. Niels Bohr: Reflections on Subject and Object, 2001. MicroAnalytix. Chalmers, D. Facing up to the problem of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 1995; 2(3):200-19. Conte, E. et. al. A preliminary evidence of quantum like behavior in measurements of mental states. 2003; arXiv:quant-ph/0307201v1. Conte, E. et. al. Mental states follow quantum mechanics during perception and cognition of ambiguous figures. Open Systems and Information Dynamics, 2009; 16(1): 85-100. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 895 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research Conte, E. et. al. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Enequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality. JCER, 2010: 1(7): 831-849. Davenas E, Beauvais F, Amara J, et al. Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE, Nature, 1988; 333 (6176): 816–8. Eccles, J. Evolution of the Brain, 1989. Routledge, Oxford. Also see, Eccles, J.C., A unitary hypothesis of mind-brain interaction in the cerebral cortex. Proc. Roy Soc. London B 1990; 240: 433-451. Emoto, M., The Hidden Messages in Water, 2005, Atria. Feynman, R. The Character of Physical Law. MIT Press (1967). Fröhlich, H, Long range coherence and energy strorage in biological systems, Int. J. Quantum Chemistry, 1968; 2: 641-649. Gariaev, P.P., et. al., Holographic Associative Memory of Biological Systems, Proceedings SPIE, Optical Memory and Neural Networks, 199; 1621: 280- 291. Geller, U. et al., Mind Medicine: The Secret Of Powerful Healing, 1999, Element Books Ltd. Germine, M. Experimental Model for Collapse of the Wavefunction. Dynamical Psychology, 1998: http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/1998/collapse.html Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J. & Ramos, J., Patterns of interhemispheric correlation during human communication. International Journal of Neuroscience, 1987; 36: 41–53. Hameroff, S. R., Penrose, R., Orchestrated reduction of quantum coherence in brain microtubules: A model for consciousness. Neural Network World, 1995 5(5): 793-804. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin-mediated consciousness theory. arXiv 2002; quant-ph/0208068. Also see Med. Hypotheses 2004a: 63: 633-646. Also see, Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin as primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2004b; 2:41-49. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Photon induced non-local effect of general anesthetics on the brain. NeuroQuantology 2006a 4: 17-31. Also see Progress in Physics 2006b; v3: 20-26; Hu, H. & Wu, M. Thinking outside the box: the essence and implications of quantum entanglement. NeuroQuantology 2006c; 4: 5-16. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Evidence of non-local physical, chemical and biological effects supports quantum brain. NeuroQuantology 2006d; 4: 291-306. Also see Progress in Physics 2007a; v2: 17-24. Also see Hu, H. & Wu, M. Thinking outside the box II: the origin, implications and applications of gravity and its role in consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2007b; 5: 190-196. Jahn, R. G., Dunne, B. J., Margins of Reality: The Role of Consciousness in the Physical World, 2009, ICRL Press. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 896 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research Josephson, B.D., Pallikari-Viras, F., Biological utilisation of quantum nonlocality, Foundations of Physics, 1991, 21: 197-207. Kaivarainen, A. Elementary Act of Consciousness or Cycle of Mind, involving Distant and Nonlocal Interaction, 2000, arXiv:physics/0003045v1 [physics.gen-ph]. King, C. C., Dual-time supercausality, Physics Essays, 1989; 2(2): 128-151. Lockwood, M., Mind, Brain and the Quantum, 1989, Basil Blackwell, Oxford. London, F., Bauer, E. La théorie de l'observation en mécanique quantique, 1939. Hermann, Paris. Lotka, A. J. Elements of Physical Biology, 1925. Williams & Wilkins Co, Baltimore. Manousakis, E. Quantum formalism to describe binocular rivalry, 2007: arXiv:0709.4516v2 [q-bio.NC]; also see Biosystems, 2009; 98: 57-66. Marshall, I., Consciousness and Bose-Einstein condensates, New Ideas in Psychology, 1989; 7: 73–85. Von Neumann, J. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, 1932. Princeton Univ. Press. Persinger, M. A., Vectorial cerebral hemisphericity as differential sources for the sensed presence, mystical experiences and religious conversions. Psychological Reports, 1993; 76: 915-930. Persinger, M.A., Koren, S.A. & Tsang, E.W. Enhanced power within a specific band of theta activity in one person while another receives circumcerebral pulsed magnetic fields: a mechanism for cognitive influence at a distance? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2003; 97: 877-894. Persinger, M. A. et.al. The Electromagnetic Induction of Mystical and Altered States within the Laboratory, JCER, 2010a; 1(7): 808-830. Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee , C. F., The Electromagnetic Induction of Mystical and Altered States within the Laboratory, JCER, 2010b; 1(7): 785-807. Pitkänen, M., TGD inspired theory http://www.emergentmind.org/pitkanen_I.htm of consciousness, 1998. see, e.g., Pregnolato, M. Time for quantum consciousness. JCER 2010; 1(8): pp. 898-906 Pribram, K, Languages of the Brain, 1971. Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Radin, D., Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences in a Quantum Reality, 2006, Paraview Pocket Books. Reid, B. L. On the nature of growth and new growth based on experiments designed to reveal a structure and function for laboratory space. Medical Hypotheses, 1989; 29: 105-127. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 888-897 897 Hu, H &Wu, M. Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research Ricciardi, L.M., Umezawa, H. Brain and physics of many body problems, Biological Cibernetics, 1967; 4(2): 44-48. Sheldrake, R., Morphic Resonance: The Nature of Formative Causation, 2009, Park Street Press. Stapp, H. P., Mind Matter and Quantum Mechanics, 1993, Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Tarlaci, S. Why we need quantum physics for cognitive neuroscience. NeuroQuantology 2010a; 8(1): 66-76. Tarlaci, S. A historical view of the relation between quantum mechanics and the brain. NeuroQuantology 2010b; 8(2): 120-136. Tiller, W. A., Psychoenergetic Science, 2007, Pavior. Wackermann, J., Dyadic correlations between brain functional states: present facts and future perspectives. Mind and Matter, 2004; 2(1): 105–122. Walker, E., The nature of consciousness, Mathematical BioSciences, 1970; 7: 131-178. Vannini, A. Quantum models of consciousness. Quantum Biosystems 2008; 1(2): 165-184. Vitiello, G., My Double Unveiled - The dissipative quantum model of brain, 2001, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 666 Article Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt of Major Impact Factors Pradeep B. Deshpande1*and B. D. Kulkarni2 1. 2. Professor Emeritus of Chemical Engineering, University of Louisville, and Six Sigma and advanced Controls, Inc. P.O. Box 22664, Louisville, KY 40252-0664. Distinguished Scientist, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, and Head, Chemical Engineering Division, National Chemical Laboratory, Homi J Bhabha Road, Pune-411008. Abstract A perspective on the development of a science of consciousness is presented. The article begins with a proposed definition of pure consciousness that is followed by an explanation of why anyone might aspire to progress towards it, how one might make progress, what obstacles are likely to be encountered, and what the significance of reaching the destination might be. In the six sigma methodology, major impact factors are the vital few causes that determine systems performance; in the present context, the ability to reach the state of pure consciousness. The paper presents a six sigma analysis of the consciousness effort and identifies a major impact factor, possibly for the first time that will render the pursuit of pure consciousness a bit easier. Keywords: scale of consciousness, map of consciousness, meditation, six sigma. INTRODUCTION Ancient works, such as the Upanishad, strongly suggest the possible existence of an infinite database (Akashik Record) which is said to contain a permanent imprint of all data, information, facts, etc., from the Big Bang to the present. This is the domain of the unmanifest or pure consciousness. The Late Maharishi Mahesh Yogi puts it this way (1): Self referral pure consciousness, the source of all intelligence, is the ultimate reality of life from where creation emerges, from where the administration of life is maintained, and where the physical expression of the universe has its basis. In the manifest world, information, data, facts, etc., are available in the form of a large but finite chain of causes and effects A -> B -> C…. Any one of them may be taken to be an effect (outcome) if doing so brings benefit to an individual or a business enterprise and the scientific methodology of six sigma applied to achieve the best possible performance of the outcome (2). A desire to do all that we do in the best possible manner with six sigma is synonymous with the excellence of the external. However, this is only half of the quest to emerge as one’s best. The other half is the excellence of the internal, the focus of this paper. When the excellence of the external is combined with the excellence of the internal, it becomes possible to emerge as one’s best. This is as good as a human being can be. * Correspondence: Prof. Pradeep B. Deshpande, Six Sigma & advanced Controls, Inc. P.O. Box 22664, Louisville, KY 40252-0664, http://www.sixsigmaquality.com E-mail: pradeep@sixsigmaquality.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 667 The topics we address in this paper are: How to go from the manifest domain of A -> B -> C >… to the unmanifest domain of A B C…; Why one should aspire to make the effort; What is the process with which progress may be made; And, what evidence is there to suggest that individuals have succeeded in their quest to reach the level of pure consciousness. In scrutinizing the ideas and concepts in the paper, however, we must steadfastly remain committed to relying on data alone for decision making. DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF SCIENCE AND SIX SIGMA According to the natural laws cited in (2), any outcome is influenced by three types of causes: (i) Common causes – causes that are unknown or uncontrollable, (ii) Measurement error, and (iii) Assignable causes – Causes that can be discovered. The natural state of a process is one where its outcome(s) are influenced solely by common causes. Six sigma strategies are all about minimizing measurement error and discovering and fixing the assignable causes so that the outcome is returned to and remains in its natural state. Six sigma principles assert that even under the best of circumstances, repeated experimentation under identical conditions will not produce identical results owing to common cause variability. That is, in a random sample of n aspirants following an identical process, not everyone will reach a specified level of consciousness. Science on the other hand, demands that they do. Thus, the quest for a science of consciousness is tantamount to a hunt for major impact factors influencing the level of consciousness. As this paper will attempt to show, significant benefits will accrue even with our limited current understanding of all the impact factors that affect consciousness. DEVELOPING A SCALE OF CONSCIOUSNESS Perhaps the first necessary step for progressing towards a science of consciousness is a scale of consciousness. Such a scale has been derived on the basis of three natural laws that the first author articulated in the early nineties which were in turn used to develop a theory of rise and decline of cultures (3). 1. Human actions are determined by three components of the mindset: (i) The S component – truthfulness, honesty, compassion, evenness of mind - unaffected by success or failure, non-injury, etc., (ii) The R component- Bravery, ambition, ego, greed, etc., and (iii) The T component - lying cheating, causing injury in words or deeds, killing, lethargy, excessive sleep, etc. Each of the current 6 ½ billion inhabitants of the planet Earth have a unique combination of these three components that determine who they are. Taking the three components as fractions summing to 1, actions of an individual with a high S component are generally expected to be good while those of an individual with a high T component are generally expected to be bad. This has been true for thousands of years and it will be true for thousands of years in the future, unless nature decides to change its own natural laws. 2. The mindset components undergo transformation over time leading to rise and decline of societies. The S component dominates during the rise while the T component dominates ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 668 during decline. The impact of environmental factors on mindset transformation cannot be ruled out. 3. The phenomenon of rise and decline is cyclical. The present rise of China and India, which the first author predicted in the early nineties, is an indication of the cyclical nature of the rise and decline (3). He elaborated these principles and presented supporting evidence in the monograph. A pictorial depiction of these ideas is presented in Figure 1. High S High T Figure 1. Mindset Transformation Leads to Rise and Decline of Societies The S, R, T components permit us to prepare a Scale of Human Consciousness. The numerical scale shown in Figure 2(a) for the S, R, T components is arbitrary but chosen to lead to a maximum value of 100 for the Scale of Consciousness shown in Figure 2(b). 115 S 60 20 T R 11.5 6 2 (a) Scale of Consciousness 100 20 (b) Figure 2. Scale of Consciousness Derived from S, R, T Components To derive the high and low limits for the Scale of Human Consciousness from the S, R, T components, it is assumed that the minimum fraction of each component required for life is 0.1 and therefore the maximum fraction of any one of these components is 0.8. These ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 669 assumptions lead to the Scale of Consciousness shown in Figure 2(b). The highest value for the Scale of Consciousness is derived from the formula: SoCMax  f1, Max S Max  f 2, Min RMax  f 3, MinTMax  (0.8)(115)  (0.1)(60)  (0.1)(20)  100 (1) And the minimum value is computed from the formula: SoCMin  f1, Min S Max  f 2, Min RMax  f 3, MaxTMax  (0.1)(115)  (0.1)(60)  (0.8)(20) (1b) 20 Thus, in the scheme depicted, each of us would have a level of consciousness somewhere in the range of 20 to 100. The domain of pure consciousness lies on beyond the high end of the Scale of Consciousness. HOW TO MEASURE THE LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS With a scale of consciousness at hand, the next task is to find a way to measure it. Ancient references to the unmanifest and Akashik Record not withstanding, no one had found a way to measure the level of consciousness, until recently that is. Dr. David R. Hawkins (4) (MD, Medical College of Wisconsin 1953; Established as Marquette University School of Medicine), appears to have succeeded in that effort with the help of Kinesiology and muscle testing methodology pioneered by Dr. John Diamond, MD. He asserts that the human nervous system is capable of downloading the information, data, facts, etc., from the unmanifest to the manifest with muscle testing, a test procedure used by the International College of Applied Kinesiology (5, 6). This method requires two persons, a tester and a subject. The tester places two fingers of say the left hand on the wrist of say the right hand of the subject extended so that it is at a right angle to his/her body. The tester rests his right hand on the left shoulder of the subject for balance. Then, the tester makes a declarative statement having correct and incorrect responses and tells the subject to resist as he quickly applies downward pressure on the wrist. Dr. Hawkins found that the subject resisted the downward force and the deltoid muscle remained strong if the declarative statements were correct but would go weak if the declarative statements were incorrect. He subjected the results of over four thousand subjects to χ2 tests of hypothesis testing producing favorable p-values. Monte et al., healthcare professionals affiliated with Philadelphia-area medical schools, conducted a muscle-test investigation with 87 college students and reported that the correct and incorrect responses to declarative statements could be distinguished from the plots of applied force versus time (7). They used a computer-assisted dynamometer in the investigation to eliminate human bias. Here too, the p-values were favorable. However, in this investigation, the subjects knew what the correct responses were (e. g., my name is … OR I am a US citizen). When downloading from the infinite domain of the unmanifest to the finite domain of the manifest, it is quite possible that not even the subconscious would have a clue of what the correct response is. It is remarkable that Dr. Hawkins and his researchers obtained correct responses even under these circumstances. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 670 The outstanding work of Dr. Hawkins, notwithstanding, it is essential to investigate this issue further. Proceeding without validating measurements has been shown to lead to catastrophic results. This is because the variability in an outcome should arise from major impact factors (so that we could discover and fix them) and not from errors in the measurement systems. The problems during the 2000 Presidential election in Florida are just one of the myriad of examples showing what can happen when measurement systems are not validated. In that example, the variation in the outcome, interpreted results, ought to have come from voter intent and not from poor ballot paper design and problematic vote counting machines. In the present context, what requires validation is this: “Can muscle testing done with a dynamometer-based measurement system provide correct responses within a prescribed error tolerance (say + 3%) even when the subjects have no knowledge of the topic”? Just as Dr. Hawkins and his research group recapitulated Thomas Edison’s search of 1,600 materials to arrive at Tungsten in less than ten minutes, we could visualize tackling six sigma projects involving highly complex nonlinear dynamic processes in a fraction of the time if this measurement system can be validated. The possibilities are endless! Equally important, Dr. Hawkins also developed what he referred to as a Map of Human Consciousness. The resulting logarithmic scale is shown in Table I. He identified numerous attributes corresponding to different levels of Consciousness. Using muscle testing he calibrated the level of consciousness of numerous individuals and works. For example, he calibrated Jesus, Sri Krishna, Buddha whom he called Avatars, (Sanskrit for Incarnation) at 1,000; Mahatma Gandhi, Mother Theresa, and the US Constitution at 700; eminent scientists, Newton, Einstein at 499, and the likes of Hitler well below 250. Table I. Hawkins’ Level of Consciousness (5) Level Enlightenment Joy Love Reason Acceptance Willing Neutral Courage Pride Anger Desire Fear Guilt Shame Score (Log10) 1,000 540 500 400 350 310 250 200 175 150 125 100 30 20 Figure 2 and Table I may be seen to be strikingly similar. Although independently developed, the first author had pegged the three incarnations at the top of the scale of consciousness (3). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 671 Number of persons Others listed above would occupy a position between the high and low limits. In an unpublished 1993 article, On the Cyclical nature of Excellence, Deshpande and Christopher presented evidence of the rise and decline of Greece (3). The plot shown in Figure 3 depicts the number of persons born in Greece that were listed in the 23 volumes of the Encyclopedia Britannica. The rise and decline of Greece is unmistakable. It should be clear that the average S component of the Greek society would have had to undergo mindset transformation for the rise and decline to occur. However, some eminent reviewers of the article questioned the wisdom of drawing broad conclusions from a single data source no matter how reputable. The availability of Hawkins’ Map of Consciousness presents an opportunity to validate these conclusions which in turn could also serve as a validation of the muscle testing methodology itself as a means to measure the level of consciousness. Dr. Hawkins calibrated the presentday US at 455 and the present-day India at 355. As per the theory of rise and decline and the laws of transformation of the mindset, it is virtually certain that by the turn of the Century, India’s level of consciousness would be significantly higher and it is hoped that the US level of consciousness would not have degraded by much. 100 80 60 40 20 0 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Century in which flourished Figure 3. Rise and Decline of Greece The concepts involving the transformation of the mindset apply to societies at large and not to individuals. The theory of rise and decline places no limitations for an individual in any society at any stage of rise and decline to rise on the scale of consciousness, even to the level of an incarnation. In fact, scriptures suggest that it is precisely at a time when a society is in decline, incarnations arrive on the scene to nudge it back towards higher S component. HOW TO RAISE ONE’S LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS Now, we consider how to raise one’s level of consciousness. In the context of the S, R, T components, raising the level of consciousness is equivalent to raising the S component and reducing the R and T components. There appear to be two approaches to raise one’s level of consciousness: (i) Conscious Effort – The characteristics of S, R, T components being clear, one could track one’s level of consciousness on a control chart periodically, say once a week. If the desire is genuine, the control chart could be a useful tool to ensure that the level of consciousness is not degraded over time. (ii) Follow a process whose side-effect is a rise in the level of consciousness. In the search for a process whose side-effect is a rise in the level of consciousness, the first question is whether there have been in the past or are there some at present who have ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 672 succeeded in reaching the level of pure consciousness. A related question is what constitutes pure consciousness, and how to know whether someone had reached the level of pure consciousness. In recorded human history there appear to have been individuals who have reached the domain of pure consciousness in their own life times. Siddhartha - from Prince Siddhartha to the Buddha - is a well-known example. One way to refer to individuals who have experienced pure consciousness is to say that they have found a way to access to A B C… without having to scrutinize A -> B -> C….. That is, having the knowledge of subjects without rationality. Another characteristic of these individuals is that humanity at large implicitly recognizes that they have experienced pure consciousness. Finally, the S component of these individuals is very high. A process that led these individuals to the state of pure consciousness is meditation and here there is a challenge. We in the professional scientific community are rather fond of rational thinking and sciences. Much of this paper is written with that bent of mind. In the context of pursuing meditation for raising one’s level of consciousness though, there appears to be a need to distinguish between what is called Shruti (meaning revealed) and Smruti (meaning learned or acquired). Sciences and six sigma are in the latter category. Progressing with meditation appears to require that we diligently follow the prescribed process while abandoning rationality but remaining steadfastly committed to relying on data alone for decision making. BENEFITS OF REACHING THE STATE OF PURE CONSCIOUSNESS Some may believe that meditation is for those in the pursuit of spirituality, not relevant for others. By now, numerous studies have appeared in reputable scientific and medical journals confirming the health benefits of meditation. Both Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev and Dr. David Hawkins report significant benefits when they came out of meditation. Says Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, “When I came out of meditation, I thought a few moments had passed, but thirteen days had passed; People had garlanded me, they were prostrating in front of me; my fractured foot was completely healed and my migraine was gone forever…” Dr. David R. Hawkins similarly reports “The miraculous happened, beyond ordinary comprehension. Many chronic maladies from which I had suffered for years disappeared; my eyesight spontaneously normalized and I no longer needed my lifetime bifocals. Occasionally I would feel an exquisitely blissful energy, an infinite love, suddenly begin to radiate from my heart”. These experiences and others described in the ensuing paragraphs suggest that even skirting with pure consciousness would bring enormous benefits. In yogic circles, Patanjali (~ 500 BCE) is credited with pioneering the eight-step Yoga system for pure consciousness of which meditation occupies the last three steps (concentration, meditation, pursuit of pure consciousness). This system reminds us that a major impact factor important for success with meditation is the state of health. Patanjali designed a set of Aasanas for the proper functioning of external systems (joints, muscles, spine, etc.), breathing exercises, called Pranayam for internal organs and systems (nasal systems and sinuses all the way to GI and urinary tract), and meditation for the mind. This system is a great example of Shruti for there was no known science available to Patanjali to design his Yoga system. Another major impact factor ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 673 important to success with meditation is the food we eat, a topic we consider a bit later. The last impact factor important in meditation has to do with whether meditation is pursued alone or in a group. Those who are believed to have realized pure consciousness never meditated in a group but this issue is important to the most of the rest of us who wish to pursue meditation for health and wellness. The rationale for why one might engage in group meditation practices is this: In the Biology of a Cell (8), The Late Dr. Lewis Thomas (MD, Harvard) writes that a single ant or termite does not have very many neurons and yet in a large group, they accomplish outstanding things such as building a colony with beautiful columns and arches. It is as though they acquire intelligence as a group that is otherwise absent in them individually. The first author is aware of at least two situations where the beneficial effect observed in a large group of meditators is not experienced in a person practicing alone. The Late Maharishi Yogi suggested that meditation by a larger group of people would not only raise the S component of the participants (our words) but also the surrounding society. Furthermore, a sufficiently large group meditating would promote global peace. It wouldn’t be difficult to design a six sigma experiment to ascertain the validity of this claim. WHY DEFECTS ARISE IN MEDITATION PRACTICES It should be clear that a teacher is required for progress with meditation. The problem is that even with the best Yoga Guru available, not everyone will realize the same level of benefits from meditation even if every aspect of the program is identical in all respects for all participants. In other words, there will be defects. We believe that the major impact factor missing from the analysis is the participant’s own level of consciousness. This is believed to be a significant discovery, although the assertion must be validated with extensive data. EXAMPLES OF THE PROPOSED HYPOTHESIS We present several pieces of evidence to support our conviction: 1. Our associate Sanjeev S. Aroskar (B. Tech. Electronics, IIT, Mumbai), an IT entrepreneur based in Pune, India, attended Pranayam camp of Swami Ramdev near the city a few years ago. Along with him were nine friends four of whom were diabetic. They attended one session every day for a week waking up at 3:30 in the morning, travelling 90 minutes by road to the camp, and doing the Pranayam exercises along with tens of thousands of attendees under the guidance of Swami Ramdev. They would return a few hours later, have breakfast at home, and go to work. This was their routine for seven days. It is clear that this was not a controlled environment. The sugar levels of the individuals were monitored on a daily basis. During the program, it was observed that the sugar levels of diabetic patients dropped substantially. Upon return, the group continued to do the same exercises at home alone but the extent of benefits dropped. The group could not reproduce the results when doing these exercises on their own. 2. In the summer of 2010, two hundred participants were undergoing a 90-day Yoga Program coupled with dietary considerations at the Isha Institute of Inner Sciences in ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 674 McMinnville, Tennessee. About 80 days into the program. A friend and associate Dr. Thangam “Sam” Rangaswamy along with his friends visited the ashram when the participants were meditating with their eyes closed. A little later, when Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev entered the hall unknown to the participants, some 20% of the participants suddenly exhibited signs of joy and laughter. The remainder exhibited no such effect. 3. Dr. Masaru Emoto, a Japanese scientist, took water droplets, exposed them to various words, music, and environments, and froze them for three hours. He then examined the crystal formations under a dark field microscope. Figures 4(a) and (b) show one set of photographs taken: (a) Ordinary Water (b) Water with Prayer Figure 4. Dark Field Photographs of Water molecules There are grumblings on the Internet about the inability to reproduce the results. 4. We have uploaded a small video clip titled, “Deshpande Experiments” on YouTube showing the first author calibrating the level of consciousness of several individuals with a commercially available quartz-faceted pendulum connected to a glass Bead with a chain (9). The pendulum was expected to move in a back-and-forth motion if the declarative statement were untrue and rotate clockwise, looking down, if the declarative statement were true. It may be noted that Jesus, Buddha, Sri Krishna calibrated near 1,000 while Adolph Hitler calibrates under 300. On the hand, the first author could to make the pendulum assume any of the three forms of motion – clockwise, counter clockwise, and back-and-forth just with an intention, indicating the influence of the mind. It is suggested that someone with an appropriately higher level of consciousness could obtain correct answers every time. 5. Swami Ramdev is a Yoga Guru in India who teaches Pranayam breathing exercises for improving health and wellness. His programs are carried daily on television and he has tens of millions of followers. Several thousand attend his programs where he is seen as urging his followers to tell themselves “my … is getting better” (e. g., my serum sugar level is reducing) while doing one of these exercises called Kapalbhati. He claims that he can cure serious diseases like cancer and the professional medical association in India is upset. Examine this from a measurement validation perspective. First, when he says “I can cure ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 675 cancer” what he must mean is that “I have cured cancer”, not that he will be able to cure every patient of cancer. If the claim were stated this way, the medical community would be able to ascertain its validity. Second, in the context of this paper, the patients who have been cured might have skirted with pure consciousness while pursuing the Pranayam in his presence but not everyone would be able to. 6. Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev cured an individual of a snake bite with the leaves of a certain bush. Sadhguru later mentioned to a friend, “It wasn’t really the leaf that cured him”. The patient cured himself but he couldn’t have done it without the intervention of Sadhguru. Again, the major impact factor is the affected person’s reach of pure consciousness and the influence of Sadhguru which made it possible. 7. The Late Pope John Paul II was beatified in May 2011. The Congregation for the Causes of Saints unanimously agreed that the sudden recovery of Sister Marie Simon-Pierre from Parkinson's disease after she prayed to John Paul II was miraculous. This example too required the ability of Sister Simon-Pierre to skirt with pure consciousness and the presence of the Late Pope John Paul which made it possible. 8. In the meditation programs that lead to levitation (called Yogic flying, see (10)) only a faction of the participants levitate. The missing impact factor may be the participant’s own level of consciousness. 9. An acquaintance of associate Sanjeev Aroskar came to see him in Pune a few years ago telling him that his five arteries were blocked requiring a heart bypass operation for which he had no funds. Aroskar told him to do Pranayam regularly and meditate on the Anahata (Heart) Chakra while telling himself that his arteries were clearing up. The doctors had given the person a few months to live and since Aroskar did not see him for over a year, he surmised that the patient had died. Only to his amazement, Aroskar ran into the person two years later, hail and hearty. He told Aroskar that he had followed Aroskar’s advice and that his arteries had cleared up substantially now not requiring an operation. The hypothesis is that the same major impact factor was at play here too. 10. The penultimate example involves the food and drinks we consume. Yogis characterize foods and drinks as Positive Pranic, Negative Pranic, and Neutral. Positive Pranic foods and drinks are said to promote the S component, negative Pranic foods, the R component, while the neutral foods promote the T component. Yogis design their diet that primarily focuses on Positive Pranic foods. These practices are probably several thousand years old and naturally a question arises, how did these folks figure out which was which? Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev demonstrates an interesting experiment in which the Rudraksha Mala is seen to rotate clockwise (looking down) over Positive Pranic foods, counter clockwise over negative foods and back-and-forth over neutral foods. The YouTube video clip (9) shows this experiment for some select foods. Here, again the first author is able to get the correct answers when he knows what the correct answer is, but not otherwise. For example, a friend put before him a bottle of clear liquid and asked him to repeat the Rudraksha experiment. It appears that the first author’s mind concluded (incorrectly so) that the liquid was water and sure enough, the Mala rotated clockwise. When it became ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 676 known that it was alcohol, the Mala rotated in the correct direction, counter clockwise. Sadhguru adds that the experiment is not intended to be a proof of anything but in the light of the concepts presented in this paper, we strongly suspect that the ability to arrive at correct answers has to do with the level of consciousness of the experimenter. This too requires further validation. 11. In most of the foregoing examples, the consciousness levels of at least two persons were potentially relevant to the observed outcome. This last example is interesting in that the consciousness level of only person may have played a role. Upon hearing that Yoga Guru “Guruji” Paranjothiar of Tirumurthi Hills near Udumalpet, Tamil Nadu, India, was visiting Dr. Rangaswamy in Louisville in 1992, Ravi Pattar, a CPA based in Indianapolis approached Sam and enquired if Guruji could do something for his friend Usha Sitaraman who was lying in a coma in a hospital. Usha was married to a physician and at the time was in mid-forties. The Indianapolis doctors had given up hope that she would recover. Guruji asked about her and learned that she had two young children. Guruji was driven to Indianapolis and after spending a few minutes with the patient, he returned to Louisville. In a few days, Usha came out of the coma and recovered. Now, Dr. Hawkins calibrated the level of consciousness of someone on the verge of dying at 20 on a logarithmic scale of 20 to 1,000. Guruji by his own admission has an abundant storehouse of Pranic energy that probably translates into a high level of consciousness in our jargon. He says he is capable of transferring some of that energy to someone who is deficient. How he discerns who is a worthy recipient and on what basis is something we can only guess. In the forgoing examples, it is important to remember that the probability of getting a specific outcome in a binary system is 1/2. Furthermore, “If there is causality, there is always correlation, but if there is correlation, there may or may not be causality”. The causality must be ascertained with a disciplined six sigma analysis. A related principle is, as we discover correlation in (independent) samples after samples after samples repeatedly, the probability that there is causality, and not just a correlation, rises. DISCUSSION The muscle testing method as a means of downloading information, data, facts from the unmanifest needs further validation. One reason we decided to write this paper at this time is to bring the ideas and concepts to the attention of readers some of whom might wish to initiate their own investigations and report the findings. The ramifications of successful validation of the muscle testing method are profound. For the first time in human history, we would have access to virtually infinite knowledge regardless of when such knowledge first became available to humanity. Regardless of the outcome of the validation experiments, the implications of the work presented are significant at least in the qualitative sense. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 666-677 Deshpande, P. B. & Kulkarni, B. D., Towards a Science of Consciousness: Hunt for Major Impact Factors 677 CONCLUSIONS A perspective towards the development of a science of consciousness has been presented. We have shown how two investigators working independently have arrived at substantially similar ideas. We have attempted to show that the stumbling blocks in the pursuit of a science of consciousness are major impact factors not yet known. If and when all major impact factors are found, then the science of consciousness will become reality. A very significant development towards progress is the discovery that one major impact factor important in the pursuit of pure consciousness is the level of consciousness of the person engaged in the effort. We have attempted to show that the diligent pursuit of pure consciousness can bring significant benefits and if the person is one of those lucky ones to even skirt the domain of pure consciousness, tremendous benefits could accrue. If upon reading we were to pose a query, “What did Jesus and Sri Krishna mean when they said “Come to me, or take refuge in me, or come to the Kingdom of God”, and you answered, “Silly, they were urging you to pursue pure consciousness”, then that would be an Aha moment and we would wear a smile for the rest of the day! Science and spirituality may well emerge as two sides of the same coin after all. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author thanks Dr. Babu Sharma, MD, Dr. Thangam “Sam” Rangaswamy, Mr. Joseph McDonald, Prof. Vasant B. Waikar, and Mr. Sanjeev S. Aroskar for their review and comments. REFERENCES [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Maharishi Mahesh Yogi on Larry King Weekend Aired on CNN on 12 May 2002 9:00 – 10:00 am. Available at the links: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0icNZnUxYo0&feature=relmfu and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nQXVRjMoUE P. B. Deshpande, Six Sigma for Karma Capitalism, Six Sigma and Advanced Controls, Inc., Louisville, KY 2011. P. B. Deshpande, A Small Step for Man: Zero to Infinity with Six Sigma, Six Sigma and Advanced Controls, Inc., Louisville, KY 2009. http://www.veritaspub.com/index.php?page=about D. R. Hawkins, Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis and Calibration of the Level of Human Consciousness, Veritas Publishing, W. Sedona, AZ 1995. [6] D. R. Hawkins, Power vs Force- The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior, Veritas Publishing, W. Sedona, AZ 2004. [7] Daniel A. Monte, John Sinnott, Mark Marchese, Elisabeth A, Kunnel, and Jeffrey M. Greeson, Muscle Test Comparisons of Congruent and Incongruent Self-Referential Statements, Perceptive and Motor Skills, 88, 1999 pp. 1019-1028. [8] Lewis Thomas, The Lives of a cell, Penguin books, 1974. [9] You Tube Video clip showing the author’s experiment titled Deshpande Experiments [10] This video clip shows the meditators in Yogic flying: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8874644544830997872# (from t=32 minutes for about 4 minutes). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 342-345 Adams, W. A. Playing With Your Food: Review of “Hollows of Experience” by Greg Nixon 342 Commentary Playing With Your Food: Review of “Hollows of Experience” by Greg Nixon William A. Adams* ABSTRACT This essay is consistently engaging and thought provoking and for that, a worthwhile read. Important questions about mind and world are raised and considered from multiple angles, but not clearly answered. It is a special narrative skill to assert both sides of an argument without highlighting the contradictions inherent, and without making a strong, contestable statement of one’s own claims. Nixon does that trick well, and perhaps that is because his purpose with this essay was merely one of exploration, not to assert a particular point of view. For someone who likes to play with their food before eating it, this might be a pleasing technique. For those who want to bite right in, it will be frustrating, but still tempting. Key Words: hollows, experience. This sprawling fifty page essay from educator Greg Nixon (2010) intelligently surveys some difficult questions about the relation between mind and world. Among many questions, he asks whether some experience is non-conscious; what is the role of language in consciousness; can language refer to anything that is beyond the edges of language; where does consciousness come from; how did language arise; can machines think? These, and many related questions are considered with erudition and style. Answers are offered for most of them, supported by citations to the academic literature, although as Nixon himself admits, there can be no final answers to such questions. Nixon begins with deceptively simple questions: What is the mind? Is it a substance, as Descartes claimed, or is it a dynamic process? And whatever it is, why are we aware of it? What evolutionary advantage is served by introspection? Does it help you stay alive, find food, or reproduce? Billions of animals seem to get along just fine without it. Why are we blessed (or cursed) with self-awareness? Even more perplexing is the question, what is in our minds anyway? In other words, what is experience? Are we aware of the world as it really is, or is our knowledge limited by the categories we use to sort our experience? Nixon believes that all organisms, even the lowly nematode, are capable of experience, and what they experience is change in the environment. Whenever there is any change in the relationship between an organism and its environment, experience is the result. How does Nixon know this? He doesn’t. No one knows what a nematode experiences, of course. In our own case however, is it true that experience is always a reaction to environmental change? There is empirical evidence that it is, at least for sensory experience. Studies show that sensory adaptation quickly sets in when the environment does not change, or changes too slowly, and a person ceases to be aware of the sensory input. So yes, sensory change is prerequisite for sensory experience. But it seems a bit much to attribute all experience to environmental change. Memories, thoughts, ideas, hopes, plans, regrets, questions, feelings, confusion, and much more, are all mental experiences, none of which necessarily depends on an environmental change. Overgeneralization is Correspondence: William A. Adams, http://sites.google.com/site/billadamsphd/ E-mail: wiladams@brandman.edu ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 342-345 Adams, W. A. Playing With Your Food: Review of “Hollows of Experience” by Greg Nixon 343 a hazard for anyone who tries to reason from simple first principles to the full landscape of mind and world. And then there is the hoary question of whether or not the brain creates the mind. Most neuroscientists are sure that it does, and that is the main reason they work so hard to understand the brain. They are not doing it for the sheer joy of the task’s complexity. No, they do it because they want to understand how the mind works. Nixon points out what is obvious but what no neuroscientist will admit, that we have merely correlations between brain function and mental function; there is no proven causal connection. In fact we don’t know, and can’t even imagine how it would be possible, for a brain to create a mind. Another possibility, equally logical, is that the mind creates the brain. In other words, the brain is an intellectual construct we use to account for the varieties of our experience. Wisely, Nixon deigns to choose between these alternatives, since there is no basis on which to choose, but notes that whatever choice is made, it has far-reaching consequences for how one construes mind and world. Leaving that unending discussion, Nixon returns to one of the original questions, what are we aware of when we are aware of mental contents, and how? His favored hypothesis is that language is the crowbar that levers conceptualized experience from “raw,” unconceptualized experience. Language lets us (actually requires us to) objectify our experience into the idea of a mind-independent reality that can be studied by science. Invoking Immanuel Kant, Nixon reminds us that if there really is a reality “out there” beyond the mind, the mind could never know it. We know only our own interpretations of what we think we perceive and understand. What is really out there, in-itself, regardless of what we know or think about it, is simply not accessible. We know what we know and we don’t know what we don’t know. Nixon says that what seems to be out there is really just our reified ideas of what we believe and want, but that does not make the world any less real to us. However, from some imaginary, omniscient, view from nowhere, it would be apparent that what we think we know about the world is not necessarily related to anything that is in the world. Of course, since there is no omniscient God’s-eye view, such speculation is fruitless, even if thought-provoking. Nixon likes to provoke thought, so he indulges his speculative side to imagine what the world-in-itself must be like, even while admitting that we cannot know. One line of thinking leads him to lament that we humans have become alienated from nature (whatever that is). Our intellectual conscious lives force us to conceptualize and categorize all our experience, to such an extent that we are no longer capable of apprehending anything beyond our own linguistic conceptualizations. Thus we are out of touch with nature, unlike all the other animals of the earth, who have a “mystically close” connection with their environments. This romantic nostalgia is not justified, since Nixon admits that non-conscious (unconceptualized) experience is intrinsically unknowable, but this back-to-nature urge is a common theme echoed throughout modern history and worthy of a moment’s thought. A more serious implication of Nixon’s point of view is that if all we know and can know is our own conceptualization of the world, then science is a waste of time. At best, science might discover an interesting linguistic network among scientific concepts, but as for discovery of what the world is really like – that is pure fantasy. We simply cannot know what the world is really like. We can only know our own experience, which is itself highly constrained by language, culture, and prior conceptualization. The full implication of this radical, antiscientific viewpoint are not elaborated by Nixon. For example, if science is merely a mind-game and has no special hegemony over the truth of nature, what is to prevent us from being sucked back into the muck of ignorance and superstition from which we have only recently emerged? ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 342-345 Adams, W. A. Playing With Your Food: Review of “Hollows of Experience” by Greg Nixon 344 I think it is irresponsible, even nihilistic, to argue that the scientific method is merely a formal system, like the rules of chess, that cannot reach beyond the game to grab hold of anything true, unless that is, one is prepared to offer an alternative epistemology that could plausibly lead to broad consensus, as science has. Although Nixon does not explicitly claim that science is merely a specialized form of conversation, he strongly implies that scientific assumptions of naturalism, materialism, and naïve realism are little more than delusion. Why does Nixon feel that way about science? Apparently, due to his annoyance that the scientific method, by its own rules, is incapable of studying mental phenomena (which are presumably nonphysical). But he does admit that “This refusal to comprehend consciousness as the arbiter of all realities there may ever be – including the imagined “reality” of objective materialism – is necessary for the scientific-technological program to continue its materially successful march.” We must overlook the implicit contradiction that any such march of progress could only be illusory if science is only a formal system of symbols, yet oddly, Nixon asserts elsewhere that “There is little doubt about the success of science in explaining the world…” Surely he meant to say the “physical world,” since he has argued that experience itself is not amenable to scientific inquiry, but even at that, it is difficult to understand how science, as a mere system of symbols has been so successful, in his view. In any case, if science is of no help in understanding the mind, we are left on our own to answer the question, what is awareness in itself? Nixon does not believe we are capable of answering that question. Echoing the arguments of philosopher Auguste Comte in the early 1800’s, Nixon points out that to use awareness to investigate awareness is like using a flashlight to search for the source of its own illumination. What are we to do then? As Sherlock Holmes always said, when all reasonable alternatives have been eliminated, you are left with the unreasonable. Groping for a foundation, Nixon thus reaches for the fantastic: “ What if awareness or experience is as all-pervasive and foundational as universal background radiation?” But in this speculation, he conveniently separates his ontology from his epistemology, for according to his previous arguments, even if awareness were a background radiation, we could never know it. In a section on the nature of subjectivity, Nixon tends to the view that subjectivity is self-knowing, or proto-knowing. While he supports the notion that the “self” is merely a narrative structure, somewhat arbitrarily built and maintained by conversations in society, he seems to at the same time believe that “The recognition of the self is, in a sense, the objectification of the subject by the subject...” The relationship between subjectivity and the self is never made explicit. The narrative self is the total set of stories we tell ourselves about who we are, but at the same time, “Subjectivity, then, is the experience of being the implied subject of discourse.” Nixon suggests (but does not state) that subjectivity is a prerequisite for development of a narrative self, for subjectivity is necessary to define intersubjectivity, the awareness we have of each other’s minds. Nixon appeals to the psychoanalytic literature to support the concept of intersubjectivity, rather than the experimental psychology literature, which I find far more convincing, but at least we are in agreement that intersubjectivity is a fact of human life: we do read each other’s minds. If we did not, language would not be possible. Of course we do not know every little detail of each other’s thoughts, but in broad outline, we mutually understand what it is to be a human, in a human body, living on this planet with all its regularities, struggling through the constancies of the developmental arc, and so on. And more than that, we understand, even if only tacitly, the existence of and outlines ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 342-345 Adams, W. A. Playing With Your Food: Review of “Hollows of Experience” by Greg Nixon 345 of, each other’s subjectivity. Nixon frames intersubjectivity in terms of pre-conscious, “mythic” feelings, but I think there is a significant intellectual (if tacit) component to it as well. Nixon is not one to make stark claims and build conclusions upon clear premises, so it is not always easy to tell where we agree and disagree, for example, on the question of whether or not it is possible for a person to breach the hermeneutic boundaries of conceptualized experience to glimpse some transcendent domain. Nixon seems adamant at first that this is not literally possible, and the attempt to do it mere delusion. “[W]e are “prisoners of our own device” within the realm of the symbolic. As such, nonsymbolic experience — even of a profound or transformative nature — is unable to produce literal knowledge of itself.” Actually, I do agree that transcendent, nonsymbolic experience is, practically, non-experience, and therefore cannot in principle be known to itself. But this does not rule out inferential knowledge, in the same way that we understand the nature of black holes by probing them at the event horizon. In the crepuscules as one approaches and leaves a black hole of non-experience, one understands its context and role within ordinary conscious experience. Nixon does not explicitly take up the possibility of indirect knowledge of non-experience. Yet he does say, enigmatically, of MerleauPonty’s “hollows of experience” that they are “not [to] be explained or accessed either through some objective knowledge-creation or through an atavistic return to animal nature. It seems to me that Merleau-Ponty and even Derrida to some extent suggest that it is within the “hollows” of experience that we can reconnect experientially with primal creativity. Knowledge or interpretation must come after.” So are we in agreement then about the black hole of non-conscious experience? Maybe not. Nixon also says, “It hardly needs saying that such hollows must have everything to do with memory, felt memory — the frame of reference that shapes experience.” But is memory not a principal content of conscious experience, precisely what is absent in a “hollow”? Despite the earlier description of a hollow, or as I call it, a black hole of non-experience, Nixon paradoxically says that he chooses, “…and I hope others do, too — a conscious return to the hollows of experience.” But that is exactly what is not possible with a hollow. As with most other topics considered in this stimulating essay, Nixon is adept at projecting multiple meanings that do not necessarily cohabit well together. A final example of that charming ambiguity in Nixon’s writing surrounds the topic of creativity. We agree that creativity is a force of nature to be reckoned with, a required first level axiom for any theory of mind. And I think we agree that creativity emanates from those hollows of non-experience previously discussed. But Nixon also wants to say that creativity is some kind of fundamental force of the universe, perhaps another one of his supposed radiation background fields. As a psychologist, I have no need to look to distant galaxies or to quantum collapse phenomena for the source of creativity. It is intrinsic to the mind. In sum, this essay is consistently engaging and thought provoking and for that, a worthwhile read. Important questions about mind and world are raised and considered from multiple angles, but not clearly answered. It is a special narrative skill to assert both sides of an argument without highlighting the contradictions inherent, and without making a strong, contestable statement of one’s own claims. Nixon does that trick well, and perhaps that is because his purpose with this essay was merely one of exploration, not to assert a particular point of view. For someone who likes to play with their food before eating it, this might be a pleasing technique. For those who want to bite right in, it will be frustrating, but still tempting. References Nixon,G. M. (2010) Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Rresearch. 1(3): 234-288. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 346-347 Cook, R. Brief Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers 346 Commentary Brief Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers Roger Cook* ABSTRACT A desire for transcendental experience seems to permeate all three papers – the phrase ‘deeply interfused’ struck my eye, and sure enough there it is in Wordsworth’s ‘Lines composed above Tintern Abbey’: “a sense sublime/ Of something far more deeply interfused, /Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns”. So although I would hope that answers to the Hard Problem will come eventually from neuroscience, these essays are greatly to be welcomed as an original and informed perspective on consciousness, expressed in well-turned prose, and occasional poetry. Key Words: transcendental experience, hard problem, neuroscience. In the First Paper Nixon (2010a) sets out his stall engagingly, drawing widely on the writings of respected authorities (and furnishing the rest of us laboring in the vineyard with stimulating material for our own theorizing). Following Nixon over the symbolic threshold into language, myth, art and religion (a leap whose implications are further explored in the Second Paper (Nixon, 2010b) and Third Paper (Nixon, 2010c)), we find ourselves in somewhat uncharted waters. We encounter a number of tentative ideas about degrees of awareness, often prefixed ‘pan-‘, that are foreign to those having only a nodding acquaintance with philosophy and psychology. But this reader returns to dry land when the classic Nagel question is raised, ‘What is it like to be a bat?’; I feel safe in asserting that a bat is a biosonar organism, supremely sentient, but having no access to consciousness of any kind. But this is not the forum for detailed debate; future issues of JCER will hopefully provide that. The centrality of language having been established in the First Paper (Nixon, 1010a), the topic is pursued at length in the Second Paper (Nixon, 2010b). The Symbolic Crossing into language is reached, homo sapiens having left the real present for the specious ‘present’ of abstract thought. The exposition of numerous aspects of conscious experience is comprehensive, indeed quite mindexpanding to read. The concepts of myth and the sacred (Nixon, 2010c) show how powerful language can be in human affairs. Both are products of the conscious mind, but like the idea of consciousness going ‘all the way down’ to the nematode worm, hard evidence is scarce. Myths are by definition inaccessible to rational or scientific analysis. However there is much enlightenment to be had from Nixon’s exploration of the topic. A desire for transcendental experience seems to permeate all three papers – the phrase ‘deeply interfused’ struck my eye, and sure enough there it is in Wordsworth’s ‘Lines composed above Tintern Abbey’: “a sense sublime/ Of something far more deeply interfused, /Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns”. So although I would hope that answers to the Hard Problem will come eventually from neuroscience, these essays are greatly to be welcomed as an original and informed perspective on consciousness, expressed in well-turned prose, and occasional poetry. Correspondence: Roger Cook E-mail: roger.cook12@btinternet.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 346-347 Cook, R. Brief Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers 347 References Nixon, G. M. (2010a). From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness: The Continuum of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 1(3): 216-233. Nixon,G. M. (2010b) Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. Nixon,G. M. (2010c) Myth and mind: the origin of human consciousness in the discovery of the sacred. Journal of Consciousness Explanation & Research. 1(3): 289-337. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

785 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part I) Article Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement Between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications Michael A. Persinger* & Christina F. Lavallee Consciousness Research Laboratory, Behavioural Neuroscience & Biomolecular Sciences Programs Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ontario Canada P3E 2C6 ABSTRACT Entanglement has been described as excess correlation between separated parts of a quantum system that may exceed the boundaries of light velocity across space and time. The concept of macroscopic entanglement is considered an emergent condition of microscopic or quantum entanglement such that functional relationships between electron spin, orbital time and photon movements allow an interface with biological systems, particularly brain activity and function. Quantitative evidence is provided for such macroentanglement and discussed with respect to consciousness and electromagnetic fields, photon emissions from the human brain and geomagnetically based contributions, where quantitative convergence suggests processes associated with thinking could be linked to intrinsic characteristics of the electron from which quantum entanglement would emerge. Key Words: entanglement, consciousness, photons, electromagnetic fields, brain function, quantification, cosmology. 1. Introduction That two particles, once proximal or identities, maintain a functional instantaneous connection within the maximum range of space and time challenges the implicit boundaries that define cause-effect models. Such a condition, which Schrödinger (1935) labelled as “entanglement”, requires a process or processes linking the particles together. Entanglement has been considered an application of the superposition principle to a composite system consisting of two or more subsystems (Aczel, 2002). This principle effectively defines emergent properties because a new state (A+B) shares some of the properties from each of the two states (A, B). If the two states are locations, then the new state has something in common with each location. According to Bohr (1958), the simultaneous emission of two particles with opposite spin from an atom produces a condition such that altering the spin of one instantaneously reverses the spin of the other no matter what the distance. Entanglement is associated with non-locality that has been described by Cramer (1997) as enforced correlation between separated parts of a quantum system that are outside of the boundaries of light velocity across space and time to ensure the parts of the system maintain equilibrium. It might even be considered as a trans-temporospatial application of Newton’s third law “for action (or force) there is an equal and opposite reaction (or force).” *Corresponding author: Michael A. Persinger E-mail: mpersinger@laurentian.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 786 In this paper the concept of macroentanglement is considered as an emergent condition of quantum entanglement. The definition is the same as for (micro)entanglement except that it is applied to larger aggregates of space sufficient to contain living systems. The human brain can be considered a large aggregate of particles that under certain conditions may behave as a “condensate” or a single global brain state (functionally a “particle”) when the activity of a single cortical neuron can modify this state (Cheng-yu et al, 2009). Two brains with histories of space-time proximity, such that a system is created, might be entangled by processes as quantifiable and as experimentally reproducible as those displayed by pairs of particles. 2. Brain-Particle Entanglement 2.1 The Bohr Magneton Connection The first step to establishing either a similarity of process or even some variant of an isomorphism between the cerebral functions associated with consciousness and those that appear to be correlative preconditions for quantum and entanglement phenomena for the particle is to discern the potential linking functions and congruence between these two levels of discourse. The Bohr magneton (µB) for the magnetic moment of an electron can be considered a central source for macroentanglement as well as its microscale manifestations. The magneton is the circulatory current created by the angular momentum of an electron moving in its orbit. This fundamental constant is 9.28 x 10-24 Am2 or J/T. According to some solutions for wave mechanics, the spin of an electron, the rotation around its own axis, is also exactly one Bohr magneton. The electron has two possible states that reflect the spin in a given direction (referenced as up or down). This also allows for two electrons in an atom with spins of ½ + ½ or -½ - ½ to have resultant spins of 1 or 0, respectively. These properties are conditions for entanglement as well as the potential digital (0,1) representations of information which is considered central to quantum computation, communication, and free-space quantum teleportation (Jin et al, 2010). An electron in an atomic orbital displays both orbital angular momentum and intrinsic spin at the same order of magnitude but with the latter’s coefficient being twice that of the former. In quantum theory the spin angular momentum or spin is parameterized to the spin quantum number which is the fourth of four numbers employed to describe the unique state of an electron. The fourth quantum number has been linked to determining the locations of matter within a frame of reference. According to Hu and Wu (2006) two interacting quantum entities such as two electrons, become entangled with each other through spin processes by exchanging one or more entangling photons. The occurrence of a quantitative value for spin predicts a potential range of energies within brain space within which consciousness and thinking occurs. For a magnetic field of 70 pT or 7 x 10-11 T the energy would be the product of this value and the spin moment or 6.624 x 10-34 J. This is equivalent according to a frequency (once divided by Planck's constant of 6.624 x 10-34 J s), of about 1 Hz. For intensities within the 100 to 200 pT range, well within the expected operating intensity of some cerebral functions, the frequency range would span 10 to 40 Hz. This quantitative convergence suggests that the processes associated with thinking could be coupled to the intrinsic characteristics of the electron from which quantum and entanglement phenomena emerge. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 787 Functional relationships between electron spin and orbital time and photon movements allow an interface with biological activity, specifically brain function. The intercalation between the photon and the neuronal membrane may be more quantitatively congruent than expected. The numbers of revolutions per second for an electron in a Bohr magneton is 6.8 x 1015 per sec; consequently one complete rotation or completion of a single cycle requires the inverse value or 1.5 x 10-16 s. 2.2 Photon Interaction By comparison, the time required for a photon moving across a neuronal membrane of 10-8 m (10 nm) in brain space at 2 x 108 m/s would be about 10-16 s. The neuronal membrane is the source of the action potential whose composites are likely sources of the states of consciousness and thought. The -16 convergence of 10 s for both the photon passage and the single rotation of a Bohr electron would be sufficient for the energy and the information within the photon to be represented within the single cycle or one closed loop of the electron's revolution. This quantitative convergence between a single rotation time and the width of a neuronal membrane also suggests that the phenomena associated with the photon and its interaction with electron orbits and shells could be more than the physical substrate for the creation of thought and consciousness. Because photons, which in large part are derived from the sun, have been argued to exhibit variable progression near the maximum velocity of c, the historical representation within the photon could involve the functional equivalent of millions to billions of years. If the quantitative threshold is approached from the synchronization of information from a field of photons traversing a critical number of neuronal membranes, then consciousness and thought might respond to stimuli at times and distances quite disparate from the frame of reference of the brain that is being stimulated. That the activity of only one neuron within an aggregate of millions can change overt behavior has been shown experimentally (Houweling and Brecht, 2008). That the application of the equivalent current dipole moment of about 10-8 A m from a neuronal magnetic field applied over the width of an electron (10-15 m) is the same order of magnitude as the Bohr magneton suggests that singular values with critical quantities might produce global effects. 2.3 Mass-Energy Equivalents Bohr had hypothesized that thinking and consciousness might even involve the extraordinarily weak quantum energies. There is quantitative support for Bohr's intuition. The magnetic moment of 9.28 x 10-24 J/T within a magnetic field of 1 pT, which is well within the range of very local magnetic fields generated around axons, would be associated with an energy of 9.28 x 10-36 J. The mass equivalence of this energy is in the order of 10-52 kg or 10-49 g. This is exactly the order of magnitude of the upper limit of the rest mass of the photon which has been estimated by several authors (Tu et al, 2005). From the perspective of macroentanglement for brain function this upper limit of the rest mass of a photon is important. First, because the mass of the photon is non-zero, the dispersion will produce frequency dependence in the velocity. The group velocity of photons will differ from the phase velocity which means that information can be stored within quantum phase differences. Group velocity refers to the singular “steady” value for the entire wave envelope within which the different complex components can display phase (temporal) shifts. Ahn et al, (2000) have suggested that information can be stored and retrieved through quantum phase shifts. - The concept of variable velocity, particularly if very small and near c, could help explain the solution of 10 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 788 20 J as the net energy equivalence between the classical radius of an electron and its Compton wavelength which is about 1000 times larger. To meet the Lorentz transformation for the discrepancy in this length, the velocity must be 0.9999995 c. Comparable differences in net velocity below c could produce similar energies. This would suggest that the energy associated with the action potential, 10-20 J and implicitly thought itself, would be sufficient to modulate the differences between the particle and wave state (Persinger 2008). Secondly, the nonzero mass would allow a third state of polarization in which, in addition to the classic perpendicular orientations for the magnetic and electric field components of the electromagnetic wave with respect to its direction of movement, there would be the emergence of a longitudinal photon (Tu et al, 2005). This can allow individual photons to carry angular momentum of multiples of h/2π with superimposition of these eigen states (Vaziri, et al, 2002). Hence, there would be greater degrees of freedom and factorial combinations that enhance the potential for entanglement. Third, the presence of a magnetic field could modulate and enhance the characteristics of the actual nonzero mass of the photon. When geomagnetic data from earthbound and satellite measurements were combined the upper limit of the rest mass of a photon was about 4 x 10-51 kg with a Compton wavelength 7 of about 13 times the earth’s circumference which is about 4 x 10 m. Within a stronger magnetic field, such as Jupiter’s, the estimated upper limit from direct measurement of the fields by satellite observations was less than 10-52 kg. The geomagnetic field component for revealing or influencing the measurement of the mass of a photon is important because of its own intrinsic entanglement. Korotaev et al (2005, 2006) showed that non-locality could occur within the earth’s magnetic field. Once periodicities were removed, coherence was observed between “random” or dissipative processes for measurements from sensors separated by tens of kilometres. Experimentally, entanglement between two spins in an antiferromagnetic solid can be affected by the external magnetic field. Increasing the field strength to certain values can create entanglement between otherwise disentangled spins (Arnesen, et al, 2001). 2.4 Connection to Consciousness and EM fields One approach to arguing macroentanglement is that consciousness and thought are coupled to electron movements (orbital or spin) and hence aggregates of these movements should reflect the microcosm even if the numbers of electrons (assuming a brain mass of 1.5 kg) is in the order of 1027 to match the numbers of protons. Stated alternatively, macrocosm reflects microcosm when the numbers of units in the former reach some critical value to allow this pattern to emerge. That the cerebral cortices display the characteristics of a single global state was described by Wackermann (1999). Experimental support for the homogeneity of this system was recently reported by Cheng-yu et al (2009) who found that the burst spiking of a single cortical neuron could modify the entire global state. If this argument has validity then the quantitative characteristics of the macroscopic manifestations of quantum-level properties should be congruent with the magnetic field strengths associated with neurocognitive activity. The operating intensity of the cerebrum as a matrix or volume has been argued to be in the pT range. From this context it is interesting that kg/As * 1/s or the mass of an electron divided by a unit charge multiplied by 7 Hz is 9.1 x 10-31 kg/1.6 x 10-19 As * 7 Hz (1/s) or 40 x 10-12 T. In general the pT range would include most of the most important frequencies of small (action potential) and large scale (steady potentials in the mHz range) brain function. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 789 2.5 Application of Zeeman Phenomena The Zeeman effect occurs when an atom is placed within a magnetic field. There is a separation of spectral lines, the indicators of photon emission as electrons shift singlet states. This process is related to the coupling between the intrinsic spin and orbital angular momentum of the electron as well as interactions between spin magnetic moments of the electron and the nucleus (Hill, 2007). These quantum mechanical phenomena provide unequivocal evidence for the existence of the intrinsic spin of the electron which is central to Hu and Wu’s (2006) hypothesis. The quantum energy requirements define limits for the plane of an electron orbit that are specific angles to the applied field. The occurrence of the Zeeman effect and the mechanism responsible for it has relevance for macroentanglement and consciousness. First it indicates that the application or presence of an external magnetic field within which systems are immersed results in shifts in functional location of states that were initially superimposed or occult. Their hyperfine differences only become evident with the application of or immersion within the magnetic field. If macrocosm reflects microcosm, even in a non-specific manner, the hyperfine structure of the emergent appearance of two (and sometimes three) lines in atomic spectra should have an analogue within consciousness. The concept of transient inductions of a “second consciousness” or parasitic consciousness was proposed by Hughlings Jackson more than a century ago to explain the experiences of partial complex epileptic patients with foci in the temporal lobes (Bancaud et al, 1994). These individuals reported the presence of “another” Sentient Being during electrical seizures which biophysically are equivalent to brief periods of coherent, paroxysmal enhancements of electromagnetic fields within the brain space. We (Booth et al, 2005) have suggested that the appropriately patterned application of a magnetic field across large volumes of the cerebrum encourages a Zeeman-like duality of states such that the person experiences a “sensed presence” that is effectively the right hemispheric equivalent of the left hemispheric sense of self. Under typical conditions this duality, like the Zeeman split in atomic spectra, remains occluded. The third important implication of Zeeman phenomena for consciousness involves the potential entanglement between the two states of consciousness, the sense of self and the sense of the other, and perhaps the third state within the microstructural arrays of approximately 1013 synapses within the cerebral cortices. Changes in the electromagnetic fields associated with the sensed presence could affect the state of the electromagnetic fields associated with the sense of self and visa versa during transient conditions when they are separated. Consequently either the sense of self or the sensed presence could exist transiently in different spatial locations and potentially respond to information within these distinctly different and separate locations. Similarly changes in one of the two electromagnetic states associated with the sensed presence or the sense of self, which are potentially non-local, could affect the activity of the anomalous third state dependent upon brain structure. Thus stimuli that affect the microstructure of the brain at the synaptic level would produce a specific change in the sense of self or the sensed presence or any process that modifies the electromagnetic fields which constitute the sensed presence or sense of self could affect the electromagnetic field associated with the microstructure due to quantum processes. There is quantitative support for Zeeman phenomena within brain space even for magnetic field strengths within the operational pT range of cerebrum. The change in angular frequency with an applied field of 40 x 10-12 T would be, according to classic Zeeman formula solutions, the product of 4 x 10-11 T * 1.6 x 10-19 As divided by 12.56 * 9.1 x 10-31 kg or about 0.6 Hz. However in non-angular systems it would be 7 Hz. The ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 790 potential intensity is within the pT range that can occur within the cerebrum and would accommodate the primary frequency range of 0.1 to 100 Hz. 2.6 Neuronal Quantum Persinger (2010), in order to reduce the myriad of molecular pathways presently complicating the understanding of cell function to a fundamental unit, has suggested that the ubiquity of a quantum with a -20 value of about 2 x 10 J could minimize the complexity. This quantum unit was the solution for the energy: 1) at the average distance of the release processes associated with diffusion time of classical neurotransmitters, 2) between charges on the surface of the membrane that creates the membrane potential, and, 3) when force over distance between atomic bonds, particularly covalent forms, are distributed over interatomic space. The increment of 10-20 J was found to be the unit associated with membrane-linked photon emission from the plasma membrane of the cell, the energy at binding sites for phosphorylation during posttranslational modifications of proteins, and the actual shift in wavelengths during bioluminescence. Such quantitative commonality would suggest an underlying physical process to which all chemical reactions that cause or are strongly correlated with brain function are related. This relationship should be transformed into larger spaces that constitute the brain-consciousness connection, the cerebral cortices. The average number of neurons within a unit volume of human cerebral cortices is about 5 x 104 neurons/mm3. Assuming an average cortical thickness of 4 mm and the width of a cortical column to be about .75 mm (or a thickness of 3 mm and width of 1 mm), then there would be 4 about 15 x 10 neurons per column. If the column is considered a functional unit of cerebral energy, then with each neuron generating an average 7 action potentials per sec (7 Hz) and each action potential generating 1.2 x 10-20 J, there would be 1.26 x 10-14 J per column per sec. The frequency equivalence of this amount, obtained by dividing by Planck's constant, is 1.26 x 10-14 J/6 x 10-34 J s or .21 x 1020 Hz. The equivalent wavelength of this frequency, assuming an operational velocity of c, is 3 x 108 m/s divided by 0.2 x 1020 Hz or 15 x 10-12 m which is 37 pm, the classic radius of the hydrogen atom or the standing wave distance between a proton and its electron. The Bohr magneton, with a magnetic moment of 9.28 x 10-24 Am2 or J/T, lays at the basis of quantum mechanics and the concept of entanglement (Aczel, 2002). The importance of the average range in cerebral cortical thickness may be coupled to an as of yet unexplored association with the oxygen absorption spectra (48 to 72 GHz) and the 4 to 6 mm wavelength band. Absorption peaks for water occur around 1.5 and 0.9 mm. Because oxygen exhibits a strong affinity for electrons, there is large amount of energy released when it is reduced to form water. The potentially fatal consequences of the attraction to sequester three more electrons “immediately” once the first has been absorbed to form the superoxide radical was reduced by the emergence of cytochrome oxidase to slow the process. Consequently an electron is donated and received about once every 5 to 20 ms or on average every 12 ms (Alberts, et al, 2002). This interval is almost precisely the phase modulation associated with electromagnetic fields associated with consciousness (Llinas and Ribardy, 1993). 2.7 Connecting Cerebral-Consciousness Timing to the Electron Over the average functional rostral-caudal length of about 11 cm of the cerebral surface one full phase (cycle) of a 40 Hz ripple would move at 1.1 x 10-1 m/2.5 x 10-2 s or about 4.5 m/s. When such bulk velocity is applied to the resonance formula derived from the velocity divided by the circumference, the typical standing wave or resonance frequency of the cerebral perimeter would be (4.5 m/s)/.6 m or between 7 to ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 791 8 Hz (Nunez, 1995). Once again this allows global congruence between the modal frequencies associated with memory and awareness and would facilitate the synaptic basis for memory storage form the hippocampus to within the cerebral cortices (Bear, 1996). De Broglie's matter waves or pilot waves, an important concept during the early development of quantum theory, depended upon the quantity of momentum (p)= h/λ where h is Planck's constant and λ is wavelength resulting in units of kg m/s. For an electron or proton with a radius or wavelength of 2.82 x 1015 -19 m, the momentum is 2.35 x 10 kg m/s. If a packet of energy was moving at an average of about 4.5 m/s, such as the rostral-caudal bulk velocity of the electromagnetic field over the cerebral cortical manifold, the energy is about 10-20 J. Given the likely range of the bulk velocity around this central value, this is well within the range of the energy generated by a single action potential (Persinger, 2010a). The variant of this equation, Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, is expressed conventionally as ∆p∆x > h where ∆p is the change in momentum and ∆x is the difference or uncertainty of location. If we assume complete certainty of the location of an electron with a classical radius of 2.82 x 10-15 m then the uncertainty (difference) of momentum is dp=6.624 x 10-34 J s/2.82 x 10-15 m or 2.35 x 10-19 kg m/s. At a bulk velocity of about 4.5 m/s for transcerebral magnetic fields, the energy would be 10-20 J. This value becomes relevant for the spatial extent of potential entanglement if gravity is considered. The gravitational force between two charged particles being carried by sodium ions each separated by 10 nm on a cell membrane is about 3 x 10-45 N (Persinger et al, 2008a). This is an extremely small force but when 25 26 spread over the spatial extent of the universe with a width of 10 m to 10 m the associated energy (force -20 times distance) is in the order of 10 J. For entanglement this marked congruence in magnitude between a quantum unit of neuronal function and the energy between two particles that compose this function through membrane polarization at the distance of the width of the universe could constitute an identity or the potential for a variant of a condensate. It also suggests that the completeness of the “entanglement” would require a “second” virtual or identical particle effectively on the other side of the universe such that both particles would be juxtaposed. With such juxtaposition a change in one particle could be associated with the alteration in the other instantaneously. Of course the critical question is “where” is the “other side”? If the other side is effectively the reference point after light has traversed the circumference of the universe, then the “other particle” would be infinitesimally proximal and separated from the reference (particle) by a single Planck’s length (Persinger and Koren, 2007). 3.0 Experimental Production of “Macroentanglement” 3.1 Macroquantum Effects Predicted by the Einstein Relation Recently we demonstrated that quantum phenomena, such as the Einstein relation, might be also manifested at the level of brain space. This relationship is formally expressed as f=(Ea-Eb)/h where Ea is the energy state of A and Eb is the energy state of B and h is Planck’s constant. Frequency can be in turn converted into wavelength or spatial distance. Persinger et al (2008b) calculated the energetic difference between 37 and 38 deg C which was 1.4 x 10-23 J. The frequency equivalence when divided by Planck’s constant was 0.2 x 1011 Hz the wavelength for which, assuming c, was about 1.5 cm. This is the effective distance in the brain that not only separates the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 792 two cerebral hemispheres but is within the range of separation between foci activated by the expression of one of two languages within the prefrontal cortices of bilingual individuals. They often perceive themselves as “different” selves when they are engaging in the different languages. Their brains can be considered systems that can exist in either of two different energy states. During approximately 2 ksec of transcerebral magnetic field application of burst-firing, frequencymodulated patterns with a slight enhancement of intensity over the right hemisphere, volunteers reported a sensed presence. The intensity gradient was equivalent to about 70 pT per neuronal width of 10 um and assuming attenuation during application would be at least within the single digit pT range. External thermometers inserted comfortably into both ears indicated that the increase in 1 deg over the right hemisphere compared to the left was the threshold required for the report of a sensed presence. In fact the slope for the 0,1 report of a sensed presence as a function of the interval-based change in right ear temperature was effectively unity. 3.2 Entanglement of Thoughts for Two People? Our first demonstration of macroentanglement involved a relatively simple paradigm. It was based upon the results of an experiment (Persinger et al, 2003) involving siblings. In that study the brain of one sibling was exposed to magnetic fields that were pulsed for various durations as they rotated counterclockwise from each of 8 equally spaced solenoids placed around the person’s head. We employed the counterclockwise direction because we presumed the direction of the field would be moving against the rostral-caudal creations of the natural macroscopic magnetic fields generated from the cerebrum. This would produce the interference patterns sufficient to influence the temporal recreation of consciousness. This rotational direction had significantly affected subjective time distortion (Cook et al, 1999); the duration of the total time distortion was a function of the numbers of rotations. Special subjects who were involved with verifiable “remote viewing” showed measurable improvements of these capacities during the days following exposures to the rotational fields. Ingo Swann’s (Persinger, et al, 2002) accuracy for information concerning stimuli at substantial distances from his brain was strongly correlated with the durations of unusual 7 Hz spike like waves over his right hemisphere during the “viewing” process. MRI and EEG measures revealed anomalies of no obvious “pathological” significance within the space occupied by the white matter in the temporoparietal lobes of the right hemisphere. The acquisition of “information from a distance”, a type of analogue to “action at a distance” was so conspicuous during the application of the circumcerebral magnetic fields that we re-evaluated our more conservative interpretation of the historical claims of information occurring in spaces and times quite distal to the experient and involving non-traditional sensory modalities. We asked the question: if consciousness was “recreated” within the transcerebral electromagnetic fields once every 10 ms to 20 ms then what occurs in that finite but very small duration of time between the end of one transcerebral electromagnetic field and the beginning of the next? What occurs during the “infinitesimal infinity” of that interval? In other words is consciousness a type of filter that prevents access to or awareness of extracerebral information? If one assumes electromagnetic configurations create or are strongly correlated with consciousness, a profound hypothesis is derived. During these brief suspensions before the generation of the next transcerebral wave information from space-time, in a quantum sense, could be incorporated into the next cortical manifold and converge within the sequence of units that form the stream of consciousness. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 793 Consequently the circumcerebral device was tuned to overlap with the temporal characteristics of the emergent processes, in the order of 20 msec, associated with consciousness. The rate of rotation of the 0.5 to 1 µT magnetic fields in this horizontal plane just above the ears (from an external perspective) could be programmed to accelerate or de-accelerate. Although a constant velocity in a circle is technically also always accelerating, we designed the experimental apparatus to produce consistently changing angular velocities. Applied field strengths in the order of 1 µT (10 milligauss) are usually considered too small to compensate for many of the thermal-related processes within cerebral space. However the penetrability of the magnetic fields within this constrained volume allows for potential storage of energy which can be estimated by J=[B2/(2* 4π µ)+ * m3 where B is the field strength, µ is magnetic permeability and m3 is the volume. The potential energy within a volume of about 10-3 m3 (the human brain) would be about 10-9 J. If 10 one assumes each of the approximately 10 cerebral cortical neurons are firing on average at 10 Hz and each action potential involves an energy quantum of 10-20 J, then this applied strength would be sufficient to interact with the average energy display from electromagnetic activity of the entire cortices. For example, a 20+2 configuration (the first number is the base duration and the second number is change in duration) indicated that at the first solenoid over the left frontal region the duration of the complex frequency-modulated magnetic field (derived from the computer inputs) was 20 ms. At the next solenoid around this counterclockwise direction over the left frontal-temporal interface the duration was 18 ms. This change continued until at the final, 8th solenoid over the right prefrontal region where the duration was 6 ms. If the configuration was 20-2, this meant that the first duration was still 20 ms but with each successive solenoid the duration was 2 ms longer. We reasoned that in addition to averaged velocity and acceleration around the entire brain, there were additional changes in rates between successive solenoids. Intuitively, at the beginning of these studies during the year 2000, we selected the base duration of 100 ms and 20 ms because of their obvious relationship to peaks power frequencies (10 Hz and 50 Hz, respectively) within the cerebral EEG and well as the then emerging research involving microstates that existed over the entire cortical surface (Koenig et al, 2002). 3.3 Sibling Study In the experiment with siblings, one wore the eight-solenoid device while sitting in a closed acoustic chamber (which was also a Faraday Cage) while the other sibling’s EEG was recorded from eight locations over the left and right frontal, temporal, parietal, and occipital lobes. The latter sibling or response person sat blindfolded in the dark in other rooms either 5 m or 10 m away. A 20 sec baseline of the quantitative EEG (QEEG) activity was recorded and stored. During each of the 6 different serially presented 5 min configurations of rotating (circumcerebral) magnetic field presentations to the “stimulus” person in the chamber 20 sec of QEEG measurements were recorded for the response person. During the recording period the stimulus person in the chamber was asked to imagine being in the other room with their sibling and touching him or her. The results were clear. When the 20+2 ms presentations occurred the response person’s EEG showed increased power within the theta range, particularly 5 Hz to 5.9 Hz but only if the stimulus person was imagining being near the response person. The greatest increase occurred over the (right) parietal lobe. Many of the response persons reported a sensed presence along their left sides at this time as well. The effect did not occur when there was no magnetic field being generated around the head of the stimulus person and much less so during other configurations. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 794 We interpreted these results as the potential consequence of entanglement that was encouraged by the application of the circumcerebral magnetic field to the stimulus person. However the major confounding variable was the potentially shared genetic or anomalous environmental history (proximity) over which we had no control. In order to accommodate these limitations, another experiment was designed (Persinger et al, 2008c). 3.4 Randomly Assigned Strangers with Subsequent Spatial Proximity During the second week of a first year university psychology class, 8 students (for four pairs) were randomly selected from the class roster of about 80 students and asked to participate in an experiment for a reinforcement of $50 per pair. Each pair was instructed to meet twice per week for one hour for four consecutive weeks. From our perspective the purpose was to establish a history of proximity without either genetic or familial factors confounding the “entanglement”. On the day of the experiment pairs were exposed to the same procedures as those subjects in the sibling study. When the stimulus person in the chamber was wearing the equipment that generated the circumcerebral magnetic fields with 20+2 configurations and imagining being in the room with the response person, his or her EEG displayed increased power within the theta range. However the effect was more related to the temporal lobes, with a slight right hemispheric enhancement. The subjective experiences of the response persons whose EEGs were recorded were even more intense than those reported by the response persons in the sibling study. When the stimulus person during the 20+2 field presentations was simply thinking about the other (response) person, he or she showed a marked increase in the feeling of a sensed presence, anger, and sexual arousal. Such experiences did not occur for the stimulus persons. Pairs of random strangers, obtained by recruiting people walking by the laboratory and who were exposed to the same procedures did not display significant changes in either their EEG profile or their subjective experiences. Although interesting the apparent support for macroentanglement did not meet the qualitative criteria or the essential procedural operations of what Bohr and Schrödinger had envisioned. Entanglement involves a process by which two particles (or by inference an aggregate of particles that behave as a single particle) respond simultaneously to a change in each others states despite the distance between them at anytime after their diminished close proximity. In other words the two distal particles are still responding as if they occupy the same space or may even be the same particle with the potential for two different states. 3.5 Geomagnetic Field-Based Entanglement? Dotta et al (2009) tested the concept of macroscopic entanglement by simultaneously measuring the quantitative EEG of pairs of people separated by about 75 m. They found that about 50% of the variance of the simultaneous EEG power was shared between the pairs of brains. Considering the measurements by Mulligan et al (2010) that showed significant correlations between power within the theta and gamma bands over the right prefrontal regions and daily geomagnetic activity, such “excessive” correlations would be expected. Both members of the pairs would have been exposed to similar geomagnetic activity. This third factor would have produced the apparent coherence or “excess correlations”. The critical observation for this study was the direction of the correlations. Pairs of strangers showed positive correlations in power output within the alpha and gamma bands over the frontal and temporal lobes. This would be expected if a third recondite (to the observers) factor produced both. However, people who shared a reinforcement history (that previously shared locations) displayed negative ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 795 correlations in power within the alpha and theta band over these regions. This could be considered an analogue of quantum phenomena when the state of one particle is opposite to the one with which it is entangled. Direct measurements with a fluxgate magnetometer of the static geomagnetic field intensities within both locations where the EEG measurements were taken were unusually similar, as if they were “the same” space. 3.6 Experimental Production of the “Same Space” for Macroentanglement To create spatial identities we employed two, eight circular solenoid systems separated by 15 m. One person sat within the acoustic chamber and wore one unit while a second person sat blind-folded in the dark in a separate room wearing the second unit. The two units were synchronized by being connected to the same computer that generated the complex, altering-velocity rotating magnetic fields to both brains simultaneously. We assumed this “simultaneous” production of identical fields in two separate locations would be topologically equivalent to a translation of spatial-temporal axes such that they become the same space. If this is valid, then what occurs in one space (and the brain occupying it) should occur in the other space (and the brain occupying it) even though the distances are significant and classical sensory modalities are not operative. We employed a much simpler paradigm than the “transmission of thought”. While both the stimulus person and the response person were exposed to the same complex configurational magnetic field the stimulus person was exposed to flashes of white light of about 1 lux for 30 s intervals. The flash frequency was between 4 and 15 Hz. At the same time the QEEG for the response person was measured for 20 s just before and 20 s during the light flashes were presented to the stimulus person. In several experiments involving three different sets of experimenters employing the same paradigm, the response subjects’ power profiles from QEEG analyses showed increases within the right parietal-temporal region only when the stimulus person was watching the light flashes. The power increase was maximum within the range of the frequency of the light flash but was most conspicuous and significant statistically for the 8 Hz to 10 Hz flashes. However unlike the “projection of thought” entanglement studies for the sibling and randomly-assigned stranger studies, the most effective configuration for producing this effect was an initial duration of 100 msec and a change duration of 10 msec. This meant that the duration at each of the 8 successive solenoids changed from 100 ms to 90 ms etc until it was 30 ms over the right prefrontal region. This duration is within the range of the microstates and the interval of a percept, about 80 to 120 msec that lies at the bases of visual perception (Koenig et al, 2000). 3.7 Photon Emissions from the Human Brain At the quantum level the intricacies of entanglement are coupled with photons. To discern if photon emission could occur from the brain of the response person in a double-circumcerebral field paradigm, Dotta and his colleagues (Dotta et al, 2010) measured the energy of photon emissions from the response person while the stimulus person was exposed to the flashing lights. In this situation the stimulus person sat within the closed acoustic chamber while the response person sat blindfolded 10 m away in a closed, dark room. Instead of measuring EEG activity, a photomultiplier tube (PMT) was placed 15 cm away form the right hemisphere on the same plane as the temporal lobe. The right hemisphere had been selected because Dotta and Persinger (2010) had found that when the average person sitting in the dark was asked to think about light rather than casual or random events, there was an increase of photon emission from the right relative to the left hemisphere. The energy of the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 796 photon emission was 10-13 J and, assuming 10-20 J per action potential, would be equivalent to about 107 neurons firing per second. This is within the range of the numbers of neurons involved with known areas of activation during specific thinking as inferred by the oxygen uptake or positron emission during bold fMRI or PET studies. The measurements were also consistent with the hypothesis by Bokkon (2005) and his colleagues that biophotons are not only routinely emitted from neuronal processes such as action potentials, but may be an energetic field that actually is the visual experience associated with visual perception and dreaming. In this macroentanglement paradigm 7 to 8 Hz white light flashes of about 1 lux (diffusely projected against the wall) were presented in 30 sec on-off sequences to the stimulus person while the photon emissions form the right side of the head of the response person were recorded every second. The output from the PMT was sent directly to a laptop computer screen that allowed not only recording but real time observation of the energy output. During the entire experiment both subjects wore the circumcerebral devices containing the 8 solenoids and were exposed to various no field or field conditions. The field conditions involved either accelerating or de-accelerating rotations each presented for between 2 and 5 min. The primary base durations and changing durations were 20 +2, 20-2, 100+10, and 100-10. Analyses of the data indicated that when the stimulus person was watching the diffuse light flashes there was a net increase of about 10-11 W/m2 from the response person’s right hemisphere. The integrated total increase would have been in the order of 10-12 W or J/s. Assuming 10 action potentials per sec and each action potential was 10-20 J, this would be equivalent to about 10 million neurons. Three pairs of stimulusresponse persons were tested and all three response persons displayed this effect. One of them reported perceiving “white light” in the visual field, even though the subject was sitting in the dark and blind folded, during 5 of the 6 intervals the stimulus person was watching the light flash. Obviously, the person was not told when the light would be presented to the stimulus person. The potential application to macroentanglement is apparent. First, the presentation (absorption) of photons to the stimulus person was associated with the emission of photons from the response person. Such “equilibrium” is similar in kind to the reversal or polarity of a photon when one of the pair is affected if arbitrary values of increase or decrease are made equivalent to + and – or top and down references. What is not clear is whether or not the photon emissions measured by our PMT from the response person’s head were the same photons absorbed by the stimulus person’s eyes (and skin) from the light flashes. Clearly 1 lux which is about 10-3 W/m2 was not transmitted in bulk. However the energy through the aperture of the pupil (about 1 mm2) would be about 10-9 J/s and with the approximately 100 fold -12 attenuation through the lens and humours would be about 10 J/s by the time the rods and cones were encountered. The third implication from the magnitude of energy measured during this entanglement experiment is the marked similarity of the estimated mass equivalent of a fundamental “exotic” transfinite particle as proposed by El Naschie (2004). This particle displays an intrinsic energy of 3 x 10-13 J (1.8 MeV) and has been hypothesized to determine the GUT (General Unified Theory) and total unification of all fundamental interactions. This value is also very similar to the particles of vacuum fluctuations within space-time. Such congruence would be important to connect micro- and macroentanglement. The concept that gravity is not a fundamental interaction but rather an induced effect produced by changes in quantum fluctuation energies of the vacuum when matter is present shifts the operation of gravity closer to Casimir forces rather than to fundamental Coulomb forces (Puthoff, 1989). This allows for a quantum-fluctuation-induced gravity coupled to zero-point-potential (ZPF). The gravitational constant would be an inverse of the high frequency cut off of the ZPF which effectively is the inverse of Plancks’ ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 797 time or in the order of 1044 Hz. This allows for possible solitonic “extended particles” into quantum gravity Hilbert space (El Naschie, 2004). Effectively the condition is set for the existence of gravitational “instantons”, which, as the name implies, can cross space in zero time. 4.0 Implications of Macroentanglement and Future Directions The generalization of experimentally-produced macroentanglement would have significant implications for understanding the manner in which human thought and the occurrence and the sequence of events are perceived. From a practical perspective, it might allow the development of the control of and interaction with intelligent machines on other planets that would overcome the limitations of response delays. From an evolutionary perspective, it could reveal the interconnection between human thinking as a “geopsyche” (Persinger and Lafreniere, 1977) or, from the perspective of integrative biology, the entanglement of all living systems on the earth that have and now share immersion with the space occupied by the earth’s magnetic field. The interactions would be simultaneous. In addition the issue of events occurring as the result of reversals in temporal direction from what we perceive now as future events would be re-evaluated. If entanglement is involved with photons from electron spins as proposed by Hu and Wu (2006) from before the “Big Bang”, then the connectiveness of matter, including that which composes the human brain and the configurations experienced as consciousness, could be affected by a novel type of determinism that could alter cultural philosophies. The possibility that a single thought could affect the sequence of events in the universe (Persinger et al, 2008a) may have real although limited application. 4.1 Geomagnetic Immersion and Connections All human brains are immersed within the earth’s magnetic field within which life, as currently defined, developed. Assuming 1011 neurons in the human neocortices, an energy of 2 x 10-20 J per action potential, an average of 10 action potentials (10 Hz) per neuron and a life span of 2 x 109 s, the total "thought energy" per person would be about 10 J. The total numbers of human beings over the last 3,500 years may have been about 55 billion, with a total "thought" energy of 5.5 x 1011 J. Energy “storage capacity” within the earth's magnetic field is its average strength of 5 x 10-5 T multiplied by 22 2 18 the dipole moment (8 x 10 A m ) or 4 x 10 J. This means all of the energy equivalents of thoughts from every human being who has ever existed could be stored or representative within the earth's magnetic 2 field. With an inductance (Webers/A) of 1.6 x 10 Henrys, a capacitance of 2 Farads, and a frequency of 7 Hz (the fundamental Schumann value) the time required for representation is about 2 ksec or 30 min. This is within the range of the electrical lability period for human memory consolidation and would suggest there are two representations. The first type would be spatial patterns created by the growths of dendritic spines which require about 15 to 30 min to emerge, assuming the appropriate long-term potentiation. These memories and thoughts would be bound to the complex configurational electromagnetic fields whose topology is the fractal space of the approximately 1013 synapses within the cerebral cortices. When this deteriorates at biological death, this information dissipates. The loss of structure dictates loss of function. The second form would be represented as electromagnetic phenomena within the space occupied by the earth’s magnetic field (Persinger et al, 2008a). This information would be maintained as transforms of the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 798 energy from the digital sequences of action potentials. Candidates for this storage would require some physical equivalent of Hilbert space within the boundary of the geomagnetic field. Stored as phase relations, the information could also be retrieved. The existence of both systems of representation of information would be equivalent to the history of DNA within the context of the individual relative to the species. Although a single person’s expression terminates with her or his demise, the approximately 3 billion year history is maintained through successive transmission to offspring who maintains the temporal continuity of the specific sequences of base pairs. If all human brains are immersed within the geomagnetic field and as a result are simply punctuate nodes displaying very similar genetically-determined structures along this continuous line, the steady state induced magnetic field within the entire line or the entire species can be calculated. The shared magnetic field intensity for all human beings as a field would be B=1/2 * µ * i* d, where B is the magnetic field strength, µ is magnetic permeability, i is the electric current density (Voland, 1977; Winch et al, 2005), and, d is the linear distance of all 6 billion brains. The average value for B would be 1/2 * 1.26 x 10 -6 [kg m]/[s2A2] * 10-13 A/m2 * 6 x 108 m (from 6 billion brains * each length of 10 cm) or about 30 pT. This quantity is within operating range of the average brain. Such congruence of magnitudes between the induced operating magnetic field strength from the topological connection of all human brains by geomagnetic space and the operating intensities of the individual brain would qualitatively produce the conditions for a condensate as well as a hologram. The characteristics of each unit would be reflected in the characteristics of the aggregate such that it behaves as a unit. This is sufficient for a quiet geomagnetic baseline connection with state-dependent properties of the brain superimposed on that baseline. Events occurring within one unit, such as an intense physiological arousal, would have the capacity to affect every other unit (brain) with specific electromagnetic configurations within the aggregate that shared the same state. The time required for such influence is quantifiable if we assume a process similar to magnetic diffusivity. It is defined as (1/µ)*σ where σ is conductivity. With µ=4π x 10-7 N/A2 and σ=2.1 S/m (physiological saline) the solution is 1/2.64 x 10-6 s/m2 or .378 x 106 m2/s. The time required to diffuse through 9 x 107 m2, the total surface area of all human brains, would be a 238 s or about 4 min. The time to access the EM configuration for all human cerebra from a single brain would be within the duration of normal ranges for global cerebral states. Similar durations were measured empirically by satellite data for hydromagnetic waves within the 5 mHz 7 (200 s) range that were generated about 5 x 10 m from the center of the earth. These waves required about 90 s to traverse to the earth’s surface (Tu et al, 2005). Within these physical constraints of the magnetic field intensity and plasma density within this volume, the required photon mass would be < 4 x 10-50 kg. This is within the range of energy equivalence that could functionally connect the production of the Bohr magneton and the operational intensity of cerebral magnetic field strengths. These latencies are within the time range of an average period of dream or rapid eye movement (REM) activity for human beings. These periods, which occur on average every 90 min to 120 min increase from about 10 min during the first few hours of sleep to 20 min or more during latter hours of sleep. The dream state shares many of the neurophysiological characteristics of the waking state, including the 10 to 20 msec intracortical integrations, phase shifts, and rostral-to-caudal wave propagations over the cerebrum. The right hemisphere is both preferentially activated during REM periods and is more sensitive to geomagnetic activity. In the waking state we have found significant correlations between day-to-day geomagnetic variations and the power within specific frequency bands over the right hemisphere. The ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 799 latter are also strongly correlated with a more recent indicator, atmospheric power density (Mulligan et al, 2010). The calculations suggest that once a person enters REM sleep the “connection” or association with all of the other millions of brains that are within the same state at the same time would allow superposition of information between at least a subset of those brains. Marks et al (1995) have suggested that REM sleep even directs the course of brain maturation in early life through the control of neural activity. Bokkon (2005) has suggested that the images associated with visual perception and dreaming are the experiences of fields of photons structurally organized within the cerebral cortices due to its intrinsic neuroanatomy. These photons would be generated by intracellular processes as well as from action potentials. It is relevant that the energy associated with 10-20 J, associated with an action potential, is equivalent to a frequency near the velocity of light which approximates the average neuronal soma’s width, about 10 µm. If these photons were entangled from previous proximity, such as from within the sun, which according to Popp (1986) is the source of most biophotons, then mutual dreaming between millions of brains would have the potential for exchange of information. The relationships between the geomagnetic environment within which human brains are immersed and the emission of photons could reveal mechanisms. We have found reliable negative correlations between normal ranges (5 to 500 nT) in minute-to-minute geomagnetic activity over 24 hr periods and the energies of photon emissions as measured by photomultiplier tubes. This would suggest that periods of minimum geomagnetic activity, whose wide band spectral periodicities are within the mHz range, would be associated with greater photon emission from brain space. In fact enhanced geomagnetic activity would be predicted to obscure or interfere with the intrinsic connection between all brains immersed within it. Commensurate with this assumption, several correlational studies involving cases collected for over a century, have shown that “information” about sudden death or crisis to individuals related to the experient occurs much more frequently if there is minimal geomagnetic activity at the time of the experience (Persinger and Schaut, 1988). Stated alternatively, they occur when there are minimum disturbances in the baseline geomagnetic connection. As predicted the majority of these experiences occur during dreams or related states during the day. The effect was replicated within dream laboratories (Persinger and Krippner, 1989). The relationships between the experient and the person to whom the adverse events occur reflect a gradient of shared history of locality. The most common experiences occur between members of the immediate family, followed by distant family and friends. Other researchers (Lipnicki, 2009) have reported that bizarre dreams, which are those that contain content that are difficult to rationalize by classical sensory operations, also occur during periods of minimal geomagnetic activity. The occurrence of entanglement from shared geomagnetic immersion during shared cerebral electromagnetic states by billions of people has profound implications. First, the apparent temporal distortions, pejoratively described as “precognition” or “retrocognition” would be more congruent with the quantum concepts that the past and present are arbitrary serial perceptions. Instead they are connected. The quantitative duration of the apparent separation between the event and the experience might be lawfully distributed according to intrinsic processes such as the central limit theorem (the normal distribution curve) whose value might reflect the nature of the “band width” of the specious present. One empirical study showed that the temporal disparity between the experience and the event displays a normal distribution with about 70% of the cases occurring within +/- 3 days of each other (Persinger, 1993). For events that occurred between 3 days to a year after the experience the geomagnetic activity at ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 800 the time of the experiences for the future events was moderately correlated with what the intensity of the geomagnetic activity would be one to two days before the actual events (Dotta and Persinger, 2009). The magnitude of correlation is remarkably similar to that reported by Korotaev et al (2005) for the non locality-like coherence in “random” variations in geomagnetic activity several weeks before a significant solar event. 4.2 The Casimir Energy The Casimir effect has been considered a manifestation of zero point oscillations. The effect is defined as the interaction between a pair of neutral parallel conducting planes correlated with a disturbance of the vacuum of the electromagnetic field. The Casimir relation is considered to be an example of a pure macroquantum effect. The manifestation is based upon the assumptions that: 1) there is an infinite vacuum energy of free Minkowski space, 2) there is infinite energy when free space is set equal to zero, 3) there are zero point oscillations, 4) external magnetic fields affect vacuum polarization, and, 5) boundary conditions are concentrations of external fields. There are three main consequences of these assumptions. First, material boundaries polarize the vacuum of a quantitized field such that the force acting on the boundary is a result of polarization. Second, the application of external fields create particles from the vacuum because energy is transferred by the external field to virtual particles (vacuum oscillations), thus transforming them into real particles. Third, and important for the experimental production of these effects, there is no effect with static boundaries. If the boundary conditions are changing as a function of time, there is particle creation as well as the production of a force. The formula for the Casimir force is: (π2/240)* (ħc/a4) S, where ħ is the modified Planck’s constant, c is the velocity of light, a is the distance of separation between the two plates and S is the area. The Casimir force across the synapse with distance between the two "plates" of about 10 nm would be (.014 * 1.06 x 10-34 Js * 3 x 108 m/s)/(10-8m)4. Assuming the maximum width of a synapse is 2 um and is square-shaped the area would be 4 x 10-12 m2, the force would be .52 x 10-6 N and when applied across 10-8 m the energy would be -14 .52 x 10 J. Although this is a small energy, the frequency equivalence according to J=hf would be .52 x 10-14 J/6.626 x 10-34 J s or .078 x 1020 Hz. The equivalent wavelength, assuming the velocity of light would be (3 x 108 20 -12 m/s)/(.078 x 10 Hz) or 38 x 10 m or 38 pm which is within measurement error of the atomic radius for neutral hydrogen (Persinger and Koren, 2007). Such solutions would be expected for the critical increments of space, such as the interneuron interface (the synapse) and the plasma membrane that connect the intrinsic quantum effect with the macrocosmic expression of consciousness. The relationships remain systematic within smaller functional spaces. If the distance between the boundary is about 1 nm, which is the closest integer to the 0.6 nm layer of charge that creates the membrane potential, the Casimir force between both sides of this thin layer of charge over the area of a pre- or post-synaptic area would be 5.2 x 10-11 J which has an equivalent frequency of .785 x 1023 Hz and resulting wavelength of about 4 x 10-15 m. This is proximal to the radius of the classical electron and the proton. However for entanglement to have the potential to relate the particle to the universe there must be an integrating factor such that each unit is mapped upon the whole (Koren and Persinger, 2010). The Casimir solution for the surface of the known universe as two plates with the inner plate defined by the average intrinsic pressure is 54 um or 5.55 x 1012 Hz (THz). The energy equivalence from Planck's constant is 3.7 x ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 801 10-21 J which results, when divided by the unit charge of 1.6 x 10-19 As, is a value of about 22 mV. This is within the range of potential difference across many cell membranes, particularly those that are prone to burst-firing. Such patterns are important for both the encoding and retrieval of information within brain space. Changes in the spatial dimensions that support the organization of particles, such as protons, and hence the properties of their aggregates (atoms) might also be considered. If the Casimir force manifests matter from virtual particles based upon applications to a changing boundary of the structure of space, then a change in the configurational frequency of space might allow elements to change spatial geometry. The altered spatial organization could result in different elements without fission or fusion that involves massive displays of energy. For example what levels of energy would be required to represent the difference between lead (Pb) and gold (Au) if the radii of their nuclei are assumed to be 7.1 x 10-15 m and 7.3 x 10-15 m, respectively? The classic gold (Au) atom has a force/charge solution of: (9 x 109 Nm2/Coul2 * 79 * 1.6 x 10-19 Coul)/ 7.3 x 10-15 m, or, 21.347 x 1020 N/Coul or V/m. This is an extraordinary value at the levels of macrospace. -35 -14 However at the level of Planck's length which is 1.62 x 10 m, the product is 3.4497 x 10 V. The effect of this potential difference on a charge of 1.6 x 10-19 A s results in an energy of 5.55195 x 10-33 J. Using Planck's constant, the resulting frequency is about 8.3 Hz. The energy difference if Pb shifted to Au or 82 Daltons to 79 Daltons, assuming a radius of 7 x 10-15 m would be 6.24 x 10-33 J. This is equivalent to frequency of 9.4 Hz. Both frequencies are within the peak power of cerebrum function during alpha activity, associated with imagination and relaxation, and approach the intrinsic fundamental oscillation within the earth-ionospheric resonance system, the Schuman resonance. 4.4 Accessing Zero Potential Energy The energy associated with ZPF or Zero Point Fluctuations is *π c5 ħ)/(4G)+1/2 or about 2.8 x 109 J or 1.7 GeV. The voltage associated with that energy is J/q or 2.8 x 10-10 V. The classic frequency of 40 Hz associated with consciousness is associated with 264 x 10-34 J. The magnetic field strength sufficient to affect the spin -24 -10 magnetic moment of 9.78 x 10 J/T would be 27 x 10 T (about 3 nT). The area associated with this magnetic field strength, electric field, and frequency according to m2=V/fB is 5 cm which is average radius of the human cerebrum. From this perspective spaces with radii in the range of the human cerebrum could have access to the energy associated with the zero point fluctuations (Puthoff, 1989). The frequency associated with the 5 43 Zitterbewegung (ZPF or “jitter”) can be calculated from π c /ħG or 3.30 x 10 Hz. The square root of this 21 value is 5.7 x 10 √Hz. When multiplied by Plank’s constant to the resulting value is 3.8 x 10-12 J √s. If we assume the frequency density of the cerebrum is within the 100 Hz range, then multiplying by the square root of this value √100 1/s) results an intrinsic energy of about 3.8 x 10-11 J. Consequently the energy for the entire brain resonance of 100 Hz (or 10 ms increments) would be within the range generated by a 100 million neurons firing around 10 Hz. 4.5 Comparable Energy Density of Universal Space and the Human Brain. Given a pressure of 1.5 x 10-10 Pa (kg/ms2) the force associated with a cross sectional area of 1.12 x 1053 m2 (the area of the universe's boundary assuming a radius of 1026 m) is 1.68 x 1043 N. When this value is multiplied by the length of 9.47 x 1025 M the resulting energy is 1.59 x 1069 J. This value is comparable to the equivalent for the mass of the universe of 1052 kg (Persinger, 2009) and is remarkably similar to that ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 802 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications obtained with the relativistic equation. 69 78 3 The energy density for the universe would be 1.59 x 10 J divided by the estimated volume 3.57 x 10 m (if one assumes a sphere) or 0.44 x 10-9 J/m3. Within the volume of the human brain this would be 5.7 x 1013 J. Because each action potential with a net change of 120 mV is associated with an energy on a unit charge of 10-20 J, which is also the energy required to stack a base on a sequence of RNA, the total number of action potentials that would be equivalent to the universal energy density is 5.7 x 107. If we assume the average power of the brain is around 10 Hz and this reflects the average numbers of action potentials per neuron, only a total of about 6 million neurons within the cerebral cortices would be required to match this universal density. 4.6 The Problem of Entanglement from the Future Hu and Wu’s (2006) primary assumption was that quantum entanglement arises from the primordial selfreferential spin processes which are the integrating function for space-time dynamics, quantum mechanics, and consciousness. The entanglement that occurred in pre-space time between electrons involved exchanging one or more entangling photons. One possible consequence of this connection is that what will happen within the boundaries of the age of the universe has been implicitly structured. This concept is congruent with the boundary condition of Nyquist limits applied to the relationship between ∆s (an increment of space) and ∆t (an increment of time). In the perception of physical phenomena as functional wholes, there is an intrinsic correlation (Persinger, 1999). To view picometer space one requires a minimum increment of picosecond time; to view millimetre space one requires millisecond time. However to perceive process there must be at least two successive ∆ts. The upper limit occurs with the maximum possible ∆s, the universe, and the maximum ∆t, the age of the universe. At this perspective, there is no process and no time, but only a static, non changing single unit. One approach to understand how intrinsic pre-spacetime entanglement might affect future events is to assume G is associated with the duration of matter within the universe. A function could be derived that relates this constant to time from which a quantitative value could be calculated. Dimensional analysis allows G(N m2/kg2) to be equivalent to the product of the inverse of density (m3/kg) and squared frequency (1/s2). Hence Hz2=G/(1/d) which is 3.33 x 10-19 Hz and the inverse is 3 x 1018 s. The duration is equivalent to about 95 billion years. This constraint would suggest at the current estimate of 10 to 13.3 billion years only about 10% to 15% of the potential has been achieved. The most obvious question is could the “dark matter” be the matter yet to be displayed? If there are two forms of energy, potential and kinetic, might there also be two types of matter: kinetic and potential? The amount of one would be the inverse of the other. The most likely (known) moderating process for such transtemporal connection would be the photon. It may not be coincidence that the energy associated with the age (or frequency) of the universe, about 4 x 1017 s would have a value of 6.6 x 10-34 J s * .24 x 10-17 Hz or about 2 x 10-51 J. This value is remarkably similar to the upper limits of the rest mass (about 10-51 kg) of a photon which is a quantity expected following the removal of c2 from the relationship. One interpretation of this apparent identity is that the energy contained within a photon with a velocity near c contains the information of and a connection with the age of the universe and supports the assumptions of quantum philosophy (Horgan 1992) and Hu and Wu (2006). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 803 4.7 The Involvement of Gravitational Energy with Consciousness Calculations by Ahmed et al (1997) indicated the effects of gravity (as inferred by weightlessness) on the human EEG, assuming axon conduction of about 20 m/s, was about 2 parts per million. However with 4 m/s, the bulk velocity associated with the cerebral cohesive waves that results in about 7 Hz for its fundamental resonance (f[n(n+1)/2]1/2 * v/2πr (where cerebral circumference is about 55 cm), the value would be about 2 parts per 10 million. This means that if we assume the transmission is by hydrogen (90% of the universe) with a peak emission of 1.42 GHz (21 cm) one complete phase shift from one peak to the next would require 2 x 107 divided by 1.42 x 109 1/s (Hz) or about 14 msec. This would suggest that processes associated with gravity could affect the phase modulation of cerebral activity. Minakov et al (1992) explored the conditions by which gravitational waves might be converted into electromagnetic waves. An interface occurred when the gravitational wave interacted with a static electric field within the natural resonator formed by the earth’s surface and ionosphere. The Schumann resonances, which display a fundamental frequency of about 8 Hz and higher-order modes separated by about 5 Hz to 6 Hz (Schlegel and Füllekrug, 1999) operates within this resonator. The most powerful amplification region for gravity-to-electromagnetic conversion occurred within the second global Schumann resonance of about f=14 Hz. In this frequency band detection of gravity waves was increased by an order of magnitude. The physical intensities of the Schumann frequencies as well as their patterns are remarkably similar to those of the human brain. As shown by Konig and his colleagues (1981) the major temporal structures, such as delta, alpha, and beta patterns, that typify the electroencephalographic frequencies of the human brain are generated within the shell between the earth and the ionosphere. The magnetic component of the Schumann resonances between 7 and 40 Hz is within 10 to 100 pT (10-12 T) while the electric -2 component is in the order of 10 V/m. Phase modulation, which has been considered the most optimal means to propagate the most information over distance, is obtained by time divided by √*v2/c2]. Because most of the electromagnetic fields associated with lightning are between 10 kHz and 100 kHz (atmospherics), the ∆c/c is .05 according to Tu et al (2005). This means the phase shift for every second is 1/.9897 or 16 ms. This value is congruent with the phase comparisons of approximately 10 to 20 ms associated with the continuous 40 Hz oscillations over the entire cerebral mantle (Llinas and Ribary, 1993). Such convergence sets the conditions for resonance exchange of information between the cerebrum and the geophysical, electromagneticgravitational environment. Quantitative shifts in this sensitivity could be modulated by minute but discrete shifts in the Schumann resonance parameters. Technically the Schumann frequencies are described by f=√*n(n-1)/2π+ * (c/re ) * √(h1/h2) where c is the velocity of light, re is the earth’s radius and h1 (40 km to 50 km) and h2 (75 km to 90 km) are two characteristic heights in the D region of the ionosphere. Schlegel and Füllekrug (1999) found that during strong solar proton events with durations between about 3 days to 3 weeks, the amplitude of the Schumann resonance increased by about 0.2 pT (range =-0.1 to +0.4 pT) while the frequency increased between 0.05 Hz to 0.14 Hz. The increase in intensity, when multiplied by Planck’s constant would be equivalent to energy with a frequency of about .28 x 10-2 Hz or 2.8 mHz. This is within the range of resonant oscillations (with amplitudes in the order of 0.5 nGal or 5 x 10-12 m/s2) between the earth and the atmosphere as recorded by Nishida et al (2000). For a human weighing 70 kg this would be a force of 3.5 x 10-10 N and with cross section of .25 m2 the resulting pressure would be 5.8 x 10-9 Pa. When applied to the person's volume the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 804 energy would be 4 x 10-12 J which is equivalent to about 2 x 10-11 W/m2. This is within the range of the photon output from the right hemisphere of volunteers while they were thinking of white light (Dotta and 2 3 Persinger, 2010). If we know the energy then we can calculate the equivalent magnetic field (B =Jµ2/m ). It would be about 12 nT which is within the range of the changes in the earth’s magnetic field surrounding a person who displayed a history of potential entanglements between his experiences and those of others (Persinger, 2010b). -18 The amplitude of the power spectral density for the 3 mHz to 5 mHz band was in the order of 3 x 10 m2/s3 (Nishida et al, 2000). When acting upon a human mass of about 70 kg the power would be about 2 x 10-16 W or the equivalent of about 104 action potentials. However the effect would not be immediate but require the integration or sum of these potentials over 3 to 6 min, or, on average about 4 minutes. This is the time required for magnetic diffusivity if all brains were functionally connected within the earth’s magnetic field. That the value of G itself might be correlated with geomagnetic activity has been measured. Vladimirskii & Temuryants (1996) found that during periods of minimum geomagnetic activity the values for G were higher. This correlation occurred within the range of 10-13 to 10-14 values for G (whose primary value is 1011 ). Because a major peak in power during geomagnetic activity is within the mHz, the possibility of a quantitative connection between the geomagnetic field, within which human brains are immersed and likely connected, and information from gravitational phenomena would have significant implications for the experimental demonstration of entanglement. References Aczel, A.D. Entanglement: the greatest mystery of physics (Vancouver: Raincoast Books, 2002). Ahn, J., Weinacht, T.C. & Bucksbaum, P.H. Information storage and retrieval through quantum phase. Science, 2000; 287: 463-465. Ahmed, S.N., Kamal, S.A., Siddiqui, K.A., Husain, S.A. & Naeem, M. EEG in weightlessness – a theoretical estimate. Kar Univ J Sc, 1997; 25: 19-24. Alberts, B., Johnson, A., Lewis, J., Raff, M., Roberts, M., Roberts, K. & Walter, P. Molecular biology of the cell (New York: Garland Science, 2002). Arnesen, M.C., Bose, S. & Vedral, V. Natural thermal and magnetic entanglement in the 1D Heisenberg model. Physical Review Letters, 2001; 87: 017901-1 – 017901-4. Bancaud, J., Brunet-Bourgin, F., Chauvel, P. & Halgren, E. Anatomical origin of déjà vu and vivid ‘memories’ in human temporal lobe epilepsy. Brain, 1994; 117: 71-90. Bear, M.F. A synaptic basis for memory storage in the cerebral cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Scicences USA, 1996; 93: 13453-13459. Bohr, N. Atomic physics and human knowledge (New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1958). Bokkon, I. Dreams and neuroholography: an interdisciplinary interpretation of development of homeotherm state in evolution. Sleep and Hypnosis, 2005; 7: 61-76. Booth, J.N., Koren, S.A. & Persinger, M.A. Increased feelings of the sensed presence and increased geomagnetic activity at the time of the experience during exposures to transcerebral weak complex magnetic fields. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications International 805 Journal of Neuroscience, 2005; 115: 1053-1079. Cook, C.M., Koren, S.A. & Persinger, M.A. Subjective estimation by humans is increased by counterclockwise but not clockwise circumcerebral rotations of phase-shifting magnetic pulses in the horizontal plane. Neuroscience Letters, 1999; 268: 61-64. Cheng-Yu, L.T., Mu-ming, P. & Yang, D. Burst spiking of a single cortical neuron modifies global brain state. Science, 2009; 324: 643-646. Cramer, J.G. Quantum nonlocality and the possibility of super-luminal effects. Proceedings of the NASA breakthrough propulsion physics workshop (Clevland, 1997). Dotta, B.T., Mulligan, B.P., Hunter, M.D. & Persinger, M.A. Evidence of macroscopic quantum entanglement during double quantitative electroencephalographic measurements of Dotta, B.T. & Persinger, M.A. Enhanced photon emission from the right but not the left side of the head while imagining light in the dark: possible support for the Bokkon biophoton hypothesis, 2010; in submission. El Naschie, M.S. A review of E infinity theory and the mass spectrum of high energy particle physics. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 2004; 19: 209-236. Hill, C.D. Robust CNOT gates from almost any interaction. Physical Review Letters, 2007; 98: 180501. Horgan, J. Quantum philosophy. Scientific American, 1992; 262: 94-104. Houwelling, A.R. & Brecht, M. Behavioural report of s single neuron in somatosensory cortex. Nature, 2008; 451: 65-68. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Thinking outside the box: the essence and implications of quantum entanglement. NeuroQuantology, 2006; 4: 5-16. Koenig, T., Prichep, L., Lehmann, D., Sosa, P.V., Braeker, E., Kleinlogel, H., Isenhart, R., & John, E.R. Millisecond by millisecond, year by year: normative EEG microstates and developmental stages. NeuroImage, 2002; 16: 41-48. Konig, H.L., Krueger, A.P., Lang, S., Sonning, W. Biological effects of environmental electromagnetism (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1981). Koren, S. A. & Persinger, M. A. The Casimir force along the universal boundary: quantitative solutions and implications. Journal of Physics, Astrophysics and Physical Cosmology, 2010, in press. Korotaev, S.M., Morozov, A.N., Serdyuk, V.O., Gorohov, J.V. & Machinin, V.A. Experimental study of macroscopc nonlocality of large-scale natural dissipative processes. NeuroQuantology, 2005; 3: 275-294. Korotaev, S.M. Experimental study of advanced correlation of some geophysical and astrophysical processes. International Journal of Computing anticipatory systems, 2006; 17: 61-76. Lipnicki, D.M. An association between geomagnetic activity and dream bizarreness. Medical Hypotheses, 2009; 73: 115-117. Llinas, R., & Ribardy, U. Coherent 40-Hz oscillation characterizes dream state in humans. Proceedings from the National Academy of Sciences USA, 1993; 90: 2078-2081. Marks, G. A., Shaffery, J. P., Oksenberg, A., Speciale, S. G. & Roffwarg, H. P. A functional role for REM sleep in brain ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 806 maturation. Behavioural Brain Research, 1995; 69: 1-11. Minakov, A.A., Nikolaenko, A.P. & Rabinovich, L.M. Gravitational-to-electromagnetic wave conversion inelectrostatic field of earth-ionosphere resonator. Radiophysics and Quantum Electronics, 1992; 35: 318-323. Mulligan, B.P., Hunter, M.D. & Persinger, M.A. Effects of geomagnetic activity and atmospheric power variations on quantitative measures of brain activity: replication of the Azerbaijani studies. Advances in Space Research, 2010; 45: 940-948. Nishida, K., Kobayashi, N., Fukao, Y. Resonant oscillations between the solid earth and the atmosphere. Science, 2000; 287: 2244-2247. Nunez, P.L. Neocortical dynamics and human EEG rhythms. (London: Oxford University Press, 1995). Persinger, M.A. & Lafreniere, G.F. Space-time transients and unusual events. (Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1977). Persinger, M.A. & Schaut, G.B. Geomagnetic factors in subjective telepathic, precognitive and postmortem experiences. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 1988; 82: 217-235. Persinger, M.A. & Krippner, S. Experimental dream telepathy, clairvoyance and geomagnetic activity. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research, 1989; 83: 101-116. Persinger, M. A. Geophysical variables and behavior: LXI. Differential contribution of geomagnetic activity to paranormal experiences concerning death and crisis: an alternative to the ESP hypothesis. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1993, 76: 555-562. Persinger, M.A. On the nature of space-time in perception of the phenomena in science. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1999; 88: 391-397. Persinger, M.A., Roll, W.G., Tiller, S.G., Koren, S.A. & Cook, C.M. Remote viewing with the artist Ingo Swann: neuropsychological profile, electroencephalographic correlates, magnetic resonance imagine (MRI), and possible mechanisms. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2002; 94: 927-949. Persinger, M.A., Koren, S.A. & Tsang, E.W. Enhanced power within a specific band of theta activity in one person while another receives circumcerebral pulsed magnetic fields: a mechanism for cognitive influence at a distance? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2003; 97: 877-894.. Persinger, M.A. & Koren, S.A. A theory of neurophysics and quantum neuroscience: implications for brain function and the limits of consciousness. International Journal of Neuroscience, 2007; 117: 157-175. Persinger, M.A. On the possible representation of the electromagnetic equivalents of all adult memory within the earth’s magnetic field: implications for theoretical biology. Theoretical Biology Insights, 2008; 1: 3-11. Persinger, M.A., Koren, S.A. & Lafreniere, G.F. A neuroquantologic approach to how human thought might affect the universe. Neuroquantology, 2008a; 6: 262-271. Persinger, M.A., Meli, S. & Koren, S.A. Quantitative discrepancy in cerebral hemispheric temperature associated with “two consciousnesses” is predicted by neuroQuantum relations. NeuroQuantology, 2008b; 6: 369-378. Persinger, M.A., Tsang, E.W., Booth, J.N., & Koren, S.A. Enhanced power within a predicted narrow band of theta activity during stimulation of abother by circumcerebral weak magnetic fields after weekly spatial proximity: evidence for macroscopic entanglement? NeuroQuantology, 2008c; 6: 7-21. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 785-807 Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee, C. F. Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications 807 Persinger, M.A. A simple estimate for the mass of the universe: dimensionless Parameter A and the construct of “pressure.” Journal of Physics, Astrophysics and Physical Cosmology, 2009; 3: 1-3. -20 Persinger, M. A. 10 J as a neuromolecular quantum in medicinal chemistry: an alternative approach to myriad molecular pathways? Current Medicinal Chemistry, 2010; 17: 3094-3098. Persinger, M.A. The Harribance effect as pervasive out-of-body experiences: NeuroQuantal evidence with more precise measurements. NeuroQuantology, 2010b; 8(4): in press. Popp, F.A. On the coherence of ultraweak photon emission from living tissues. Disequilibrium and selforganization, 1986; 207-230. Schlegel, K. & Fullekrug, M. Schumann resonance parameter changes during high-energy partice precipitation. Journal of Geophysical Research, 1999; 104: 10111-10118. Schrodinger, E. Discussion of the probability relations between separated systems. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 1935; 31: 555-563. Tu, L.C., Luo, J., Gilles, G.T. The mass of the photon. Reports on Progress in Physics, 2005; 68: 77-130. Vaziri, A., Weihs, G., Zeilinger, A. Experimental two-photon, three-dimensional entanglement for quantum communication. Physics Review Letters, 2002; 89: 1-4. Vladimirskii, B. M. & Temuryants, N. A. Nuclear magnetic resonance in the geomagnetic field: the possible mechanism of action f weak electromagnetic fields on biological and physicochemical systems. Biophysics, 1996; 41: 939-942. Volland, H. Global, quasti-static electric fields in the earth’s environment. In H. Dolezalek & R. Reiter (eds) Electrical processes in atmospheres. Dr. Dietrich Stinkoff Verlag: Darmstat, 1977, pp. 509-528. Winch, D. E., Ivers, D. J., Turner, J. P. R. & Stening, R. J. Geomagnetism and Schmidt quasi-normalization. Geophysical Journal International, 2005; 160: 487-504. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

651 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 651-655 Sahner, D. The Fringe-Nucleus Interface of Consciousness: Relevance to the Integrated Phenomenal Experience Elicited by Poetry Essay The Fringe-Nucleus Interface of Consciousness: Relevance to the Integrated Phenomenal Experience Elicited by Poetry David Sahner* ABSTRACT Parallels are drawn between sensorial consciousness, using visual consciousness as an exemplification, and the phenomenal experience of poetry. William James‟ distinction between the nucleus and fringe elements of consciousness, as extended by Bruce Mangan, is used as a framework that naturally lends itself to the identification of homologies with poetics. Key Words: consciousness, fringe, nucleus, interface, phenomenal experience, poetry. William James brilliantly dissected the “fringe” from the “nucleus” of consciousness. Although these specific terms have been emphasized and adopted by others who have analyzed his work in more recent years, they have risen to prominence, so I will use the same designations here. These dual concepts form the basis for fundamental analogies that can be discovered between poetry as an integrated phenomenal experience and the workings of consciousness in general. Obviously “consciousness,” and especially phenomenological consciousness, is a charged topic for which no completely embraced theory exists even if many floodlights from different academic, philosophical, and scientific quarters have provided tantalizing glimpses of the beast. A review of those theories, and the attendant controversy, strays far beyond the borders of this paper, in which I will focus, primarily, on William James‟ enduring subjective insights into consciousness, which have been recently amplified and extended by Bruce Mangan (2007). An examination of the relevance of these brilliant intuitions to literature, and poetry in particular, directly invites mention of some of the observations made by the philosopher Merleau-Ponty, whose quotes are woven into this essay.Obviously, the evocative potency of expertly wrought poetry often subtends several human senses, so the analogies I draw are limited to principles rather than discrete organic elements underlying the neuroscience of visual perception. What is a “nucleus” and what, precisely, is a “fringe”? By way of example, one might consider, as an instantiation of a nucleus, the grainy, ovoid, nebulously delimited patch of reflected light scored by the whorled grain of lacquered wood belonging to the table from which this light projects to my fovea at a given moment as the raw material for a percept at the nucleus of my conscious visual attention. Purists might complain of an apparent conflation between consciousness and attention here, but let‟s stay the course here for a moment. Although my central gaze is chiefly tethered to this blotch of light and cannot Correspondence: David Sahner, M.D., Aeneas Medical Consulting, LLC. E-mail: davidsahner@yahoo.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 651-655 Sahner, D. The Fringe-Nucleus Interface of Consciousness: Relevance to the Integrated Phenomenal Experience Elicited by Poetry 652 appreciate a table clearly in its entirety, I understand perfectly well that this is, indeed, a table for several reasons. I know that I set my laptop upon a table about 2 hours ago, that the “imperfectly” perceived black keyboard of my laptop, with its inscrutable characters (that I could easily confirm to be the alphabet had I the inclination to shift my glance), is only about 6 inches away from the patch of light, and that I hear the unprocessed din of numerous patrons at similar tables in the coffee shop in which I am writing. All of this contextual information, albeit sketchy, lends certitude to the fundamental nature of the nucleus I am focused upon, the blotch of light. The interface between the “contextual fringe,” a penumbra of sorts, and the reified nucleus at its center, is crucial to my interpretation of this visual experience. Bruce Mangan has recently provided an overview of James‟ distinction between nucleus and fringe with a twist, focusing heavily on the fringe-nucleus interface. It will be argued that Bruce Mangan‟s conception of the functional relevance of the “fringe-nucleus interface” can be profitably extended to the sequential interpretation of the concatenation of images, qualia, and qualia-laden mental constructs one encounters during the reading of a poem, each of which transiently assumes the character of a nucleus and then fringe element, uniting in a contextual manner to produce an overall cognitive, experiential, and affective portrait that is carried away from the poem, and that is, in fact, all that is left of it as a unified whole when the volume of poetry is closed. I recognize that the visual fringe-nucleus is instantaneous, and that I am smearing the nucleus-fringe example I provided above over a more extended period of time, invoking memory in the genesis of the “feel of the poem.” This is not, however, a careless misapplication of James‟ philosophy. As Bruce Mangan observes, William James recognized that there is a “shadowy scheme of the „form‟ of an opera play, or book, which remains in our minds and on which we pass judgment when the actual thing is gone” (James, 1890). I seek here to add lineaments to the face of that “shadowy scheme,” and expose its roots in recollected qualia and qualia-laden mental constructs evoked, often in a liminal or subliminal way, by the parade of linked images and metaphors of a poem. Poetry, or a certain brand of poetry at least, is uniquely poised to leave a durable shadowy scheme impregnated with affect and a specific feeling in a manner that technical prose simply cannot. What inhabits the nucleus of visual consciousness? An amalgam of color, contour, apparent texture, and, perhaps, other attributes (or “qualia”) of visual experience, but this nucleus is not an island, of course. Its membrane is porous, allowing permeation by adjacent if indirectly and hazily sensed visual experience, and that context suffuses the nucleus and its environs with meaning and/or identity as a higher-level qualia-laden mental construct. An example of this has already been presented. Beyond this intermixture within the same sensory realm, concomitant affiliated sensations, either auditory or olfactory for example, even if halfappreciated, color the nucleus with meaning, assisting in speciation through a process of heteromodal integration that yields a unified phenomenal experience. Each of the component qualia belonging to that experience, particularly those at the nucleus of conscious attention, and the integrated mental construct of which these qualia form are part, are filled with unique, if partially apprehended associative resonances and affective load. Merleau-Ponty was keenly aware of this when he wrote “. . . this red under my eyes is not . . . a pellicle of being without thickness . . . (It is a) punctuation in the field of red things, which includes the tiles of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 651-655 Sahner, D. The Fringe-Nucleus Interface of Consciousness: Relevance to the Integrated Phenomenal Experience Elicited by Poetry 653 rooftops, the flags of gatekeepers and of the revolution, certain terrains near Aix or in Madagascar, it is also a punctuation in the field of red garments, which includes, along with the dresses of women, robes of professors, bishops, and advocate generals . . .” (from The Visible and the Invisible, trans. Alphonso Lingis 1968). By extension, then, a red velvet dress is charged with personal relevance – and the way that relevance feels – that cannot be perfectly replicated in another being. I have never been to Madagascar. Nor do I have access to the other fugitive associations that may have eluded Merleau-Ponty when he wrote those lines. Bruce Mangan adroitly summarizes the essence of the relationship between nucleus and fringe. According to Mangan, William James‟ fringe represents an abstract distillate of context that imparts an added layer of meaning or “rightness” to the nucleus. He states: “. . . the fringe stands between nonconscious and focal conscious processing, using a few wisps of experience to radically condense or summarize nonconscious information of extreme complexity,” and goes on to describe two fringe experiences he dubs “rightness” and “wrongness,” which “signal (to) consciousness the degree to which nonconscious processing has determined that a given nucleus does or does not fit its appropriate context” (Mangan, 2007). This is the “interface function” of the fringe rightly stressed by Mangan, and it may be localized to the dominion of the right cerebral hemisphere in Ian McGilchrist‟s synthesis of human cognition, prior to the left hemisphere‟s interrogation and verbal dressing of that which has been perceived (McGilchrist, 2010). What has this to do with poetry? A poem is populated by nuclei that may or may not bear narrative connection. These consist of palpable images and qualia-laden constructs yoked by startling verbs. Phrases, in essence, that synthesize new meaning for the reader through the fresh use of metaphorical language and other poetic devices. These nuclei are strung together, but do not remain wholly discrete. Their invisible fringe forces each act promiscuously among them. Those nuclei that have passed, and which are relegated to the fringe, continue to influence the nucleus of the moment, casting, as it were, a limelight upon it. And, in truth, this influence is bidirectional. This is true of both narrative poetry and the current “dissociative” poetry so in vogue at this time, which has been described as a “vertiginous” brand of poetry meant to question the very struts that support perceived reality (Hoagland, 2010). Ironically, in doing so, it affords a reasonable glimpse of the only reality there can ever be: that which is internally experienced, even if, at times, vertiginously. There is a difference, of course, between this selectively recollected fringe that bleeds its meaning into the transfixed nucleus of the moment in the midst of reading a poem, consisting, as it does of slightly moldering or transmuted nuclei that have passed, and the “visual fringe,” present contemporaneously with the nucleus of visual consciousness – a fringe, by contrast, that may never have been fully digested, yet is, still, summarized as context. While words are mutable and, frequently, ambiguous signs that must be interpreted, meaning also fills the hollows, the invisible communions between words. Realization of the seething life that resides in these interstices is not new, and derives, I would contend, from the same “fringe-nucleus” forces described above. The fringe exerts a type of hegemonic rule over the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 651-655 Sahner, D. The Fringe-Nucleus Interface of Consciousness: Relevance to the Integrated Phenomenal Experience Elicited by Poetry 654 nucleus. In 1952, Merleau-Ponty famously observed that “as far as language is concerned . . . the sense appears only at the intersection of and, as it were, in the interval between words.” I write, for example, the phrase “savage metal.” What, precisely does this conjure up in the mind? Nothing that is completely definable, although many lucid – even if dimly perceived or simply “felt” – images involuntarily flit across the stage of consciousness: the sword, for example but, even more particularly, the rapacity of the man whose hand wields it. Or maybe it is the cold, blind terror of a steely blade evoking images of wolf-pack hysteria, madness and genocide. The interpretations are rife and reader-driven. And for each reader, an amalgam of images of variable potency produces a sense that did not exist until it was called forth by that phrase. The imaginings are not merely visual, of course. Upon reading the words, the net of each intellect dredges the lake of personal experience, producing a singular resonance within. Personal meaning is poured into the spaces between the words. The relation each word bears to another, its orientation, the sense that bleeds from one word to another, can never be perfectly recapitulated – either inter-individually or intra-individually over time. The considerations above have implications for the theory of deconstructionism. Cultural context is not enough to understand a text as it was written. But does this matter? Each individual consciousness forms its own species. And, fittingly, the same relational balance, the same contextual coloring and cross-coloring that imbues written language with the sole meaning it has for a given reader at a given time, mimics the contextual essence of vision, in which, for example, the isolated reflection of ocher light that arrows from the undulant surfaces of wavelets in a bay are perceived in a lone rightness made possible only by the feebly perceived fringe– the summarized sea and littoral, the deepening dark above - by which this nucleus of visual consciousness is specifically enshrouded for a given individual. The fluid fringe-nucleus interface, pregnant with contextual relevance defining the rightness of what we think we perceive, bears a striking analogy to the relations between words that have been read. The present is smeared over milliseconds during which the prior images and sensations the text hortatively calls up are blended with and define the subsequent “nuclei” on which the eye alights. And the character of these images, the way in which they seep into each other, can be realized only once. This is the beauty of poetry. Like the fabulous beauty of an alabaster face belonging to a young woman dying of consumption in the nineteenth century, the brevity of her existence, the only existence of its exact kind, adds poignancy to that beauty. Just so, the experiential flash of well-wrought poetry is made more luminous by the knowledge that the words will never again scintillate in the same way in the mind of another. Language and consciousness are brethren – the face and the obverse of the same coin. We gaze at a pear in a dish. The surface of that pear at the nucleus of our conscious attention takes on its “pear-ness at that moment,” its quiddity, from the manner in which it intercalates with its context, even if the latter is only nebulously perceived in the fringe of consciousness. That instantaneous impression conveys a singular meaning that may be laden with affective content. The nuclei, the images and metaphors that trace the contour of a poem, follow the same rules; they behave for us in an identical way. In the prospectus submitted by Merleau-Ponty to the Collège de France in support of his candidacy, he writes that “the spoken phrase is understood only if the hearer, following the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 4 | pp. 651-655 Sahner, D. The Fringe-Nucleus Interface of Consciousness: Relevance to the Integrated Phenomenal Experience Elicited by Poetry 655 „verbal chain,‟ goes beyond each of its links in the direction that they all designate together.” It might be said, however, that, in the domain of written or spoken poetry in its most evocative and phenomenologically rich forms and, perhaps even more so, in its experimental habiliment, the vector that defines this directional force may shift polarity from reader to reader in ways that do not obey authorial intent. I will not enter upon the terrain of the debate that has centered on that “intent” and what it may mean, but it can be argued that some of the most durable poetic masterpieces owe no small part of their fortune to the limitless interpretation they have engendered. Perhaps the mutable and nuanced meanings of a given poem, its continual intersubjective reinvention, are what guard most against perishability. The nuclei carefully beaded on the narrative (or dissociative) string of the poem, the dynamic interplay among them tinged by the prism through which the unique reader takes in the lines, create internal realities that form a nexus with those of the writer and other readers. These realities partially overlap but cannot be identical in view of the proliferation of new “heterotypal” fringe-nucleus scaffolds erected by the readers of each subsequent generation. Thus, one poem begets many, influenced by culture, intersubjectivity, and the store of personal experience upon which all associative resonances hinge. No poem is immortal but some, a relative few, may have an infinite number of lives. References James, W. (1890 and 1950). The Principles of Psychology, vol. 1. (New York: Dover Publications) Merleau-Ponty, M. Translated by various authors in The Merleau-Ponty Reader, eds. Toadvine T, Lawlor L. (Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2007). Cited quotations obtained from chapters 13 (Indirect Language and the Voices of Silence), 14 (An Unpublished Text by Maurice Merleau-Ponty: A Prospectus of His Work), and 19 (The Intertwining – The Chiasm). Mangan, B. “Cognition, Fringe Consciousness, and the Legacy of William James,” In: The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness, eds. Velmans M, Schneider S. (Blackwell Publishing, 2007). McGilchrist, I. The Master and his Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2009). Hoagland, T. “Recognition, Vertigo and Passionate Worldliness.” Poetry, Vol. 196, No. 5 (September 2010). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 348-349 Deiss, S. Comment on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness 348 Commentary Commentary on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness Stephen Deiss* ABSTRACT Works of this type which help elucidate how we can come to misunderstand each other are important given that fact. While we seem unable to know anything directly about our own or others unconscious experiences, as Nixon shows there is plenty of evidence that it exists for organisms with brains and could exist as well as for all manner of systems throughout the universe. This leads naturally to some blend of panpsychisn or panexperientialism and solves, or hopefully will one day be seen to solve, a host of problems in the philosophy of science as well as having wider socio-cultural implications ranging from support for strong or radical ecology or perhaps a new kind of non-human centered spirituality. Key Words: Panexperientialism, self consciousness. In this paper (Nixon, 2010) the author seeks to highlight the distinction between the terms 'experience' and 'consciousness' and show how it supports a panpsychist view. According to his use of these terms experience is the more fundamental of the two, and consciousness always includes the extra element of self experience. Some of us have used these terms differently. For instance in the reference to my work the author cites [Deiss, 2009 in the paper under review], he says that I use the two equivalently. That is true. However, I do distinguish experience and self experience or, equivalently in my case, consciousness and self consciousness. There is lengthy discussion of how various philosophers have used or ignored this distinction, as well as dictionary perspectives, and the etiology of the word conscious. Some do not acknowledge that there can be experience that is not conscious (as in self conscious), others would allow for experience that has no subject. It was helpful to see these differing historical and contemporary viewpoints outlined. Nixon (2010) comes down clearly on the side of allowing experience with and without self experience. There is a suggestion in the paper that consciousness has something to do with memory especially in the last paragraph. I would have liked to see this elaborated more since it is a key idea that I have promoted in the previous reference. I would like to see how others view the importance. There is also the claim that allowing for experience without a self opens the door to legitimization of Psi experiences. However, this seemed taken for granted rather than explained in detail, and I did not follow the connection myself. The paper also has an appendix that recounts 21 things (experimental phenomena, and relevant theories) that support the case for distinguishing experiences that have or do not have a subjective perspective attached. In the end we must acknowledge sleight cultural differences in language use. The language police are understaffed and will remain so. Works of this type which help elucidate how we can come to Correspondence: Stephen Deiss, Conscious Systems Consultant, San Diego, CA E-mail: ob1knob@earthlink.net ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 348-349 Deiss, S. Comment on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness 349 misunderstand each other are important given that fact. While we seem unable to know anything directly about our own or others unconscious experiences, as Nixon shows there is plenty of evidence that it exists for organisms with brains and could exist as well as for all manner of systems throughout the universe. This leads naturally to some blend of panpsychisn or panexperientialism and solves, or hopefully will one day be seen to solve, a host of problems in the philosophy of science as well as having wider socio-cultural implications ranging from support for strong or radical ecology or perhaps a new kind of non-human centered spirituality. References Nixon, G. M. (2010). From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness: The Continuum of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 1(3): 216-233. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1027 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part II) Article Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind Quentin Ruyant* ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is to construct an ontology to account consistently for both the objective and subjective worlds. First, I will determine the fundamental properties of consciousness from a first-person perspective and derive from them a subjective definition of consciousness. Second, I will infer from their existence at a macroscopic level some expectations about the empirical world and show that these expectations can be identified with quantum properties of matter. This will lead to the construction of an ontology and to a physical counterpart of the former subjective definition of consciousness, which accounts for the existence of a continuum between conscious and unconscious states. Finally, I will go beyond the common objections to quantum mind to propose a simple yet suitable model of mind which explains why consciousness arises specifically inside the nervous systems of living creatures. Key Words: quantum physics, consciousness, unconsciousness, mind, ontology, subjective, objective, matter, quantum entanglement, nervous system, chaotic system. Introduction The main problem faced by philosophy of consciousness is to understand how our subjectivity emerges from the objective world. Choosing between dualism and monism is not the primary question, as both face the same problems. Whether a soul is attached to our brain or emerge from it does not change fundamentally the perspective: the question is how can this happen? The root of this problem lies in the inability of our scientific knowledge to tell us what it is to be. The price for building an objective representation of the world is the exclusion of the subject from this representation, as Schrödinger (1974) pointed out. Science tells us how things appear to us, not what they are. It offers clues about regularities in our empirical world, but being is something singular. Actually, every moment is singular – not that they are different from each other, but that I live them one by one, and each one is the moment I live. *Correspondence: Quentin Ruentin. E-mail: quentin.ruyant@gmail.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1028 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind Being is what we could call something transcendent, beyond any possible description: no word or mathematical formula can describe something as simple as what it is to be, to feel or to act. The only way we can share our inner experience with fellow human beings is to assume that they live it as we do, that they see our colors and hear our sounds – our qualia. But how could we describe our colors and sounds beyond giving them a conventional name? Subjectivity is given, the base of everything else and is thus unspeakable. Given that transcendental aspect of the first-person experience, the mind-body problem can be reformulated as follows: how is it possible that such a transcendence exists while we are simultaneously able to build an objective and efficient scientific model of reality? How is it that a subject as the object of another subject can be reducible to an objective description in terms of separated particles and physical laws and what happened to transcendence during this objectification process? Did it totally vanish? In an attempt to answer this question, I will define consciousness and its fundamental properties from a first-person perspective. I will then attempt to infer what we can expect from an objective description of the world to be consistent with the fact that these properties exist. Next I will discuss the compatibility of these expectations with our knowledge of the physical world and especially with the fundamental aspects of it through quantum physics. I will propose an ontology in coherence with all these observations. Finally I will develop the theory of mind that directly follows from this ontology and explain briefly how, according to this theory, consciousness might arise inside the brain of living creatures. 1. The Conscious Experience Consciousness as perception of the material world First, I will attempt to define what it is to be conscious. I won’t bother with superfluous aspects of consciousness: I am not trying to describe it extensively, but to find out what is essential to it, so let’s put aside the mechanisms that are unnecessary or that are only specific patterns of a more generic property. Memory, for example, is not essential, neither are reasoning or emotions. Even sensory perception is superfluous. Indeed all these aspects are the content of our consciousness. This content exists, but it could be of a different nature without really affecting the fact that we are conscious. What is essential to consciousness is not its content, but above all the sole ability to perceive something. One could object that memory is something essential, because for various reasons it would be impossible to be conscious without a memory. It may be true, but I am not trying here to find the conditions for consciousness to exist, but to determine its essence, and in fact, memory may be a necessary condition of consciousness but not a property of it. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1029 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind As Husserl noted, consciousness is always consciousness of something. There is no consciousness by itself, and even the purest imaginable conscious state can be interpreted a minima as consciousness of a mental state, which is still something. There is no reason to fundamentally distinguish between mental states and perceptions: both are objects of our awareness. From now, I will use the term "perception" in a broad sense to reference any kind of awareness. The first fundamental property of consciousness is the ability to perceive something. Consciousness as action on the material world We could add that this something has a material origin, since we usually perceive the material world, or to be precise, its representation built by the brain, and it is almost certain, as confirmed by lesions and drugs, that our mental states do have a material origin inside our brains too. But it is in fact more appropriate, conversely, to define the material world as the origin of our perceptions, since they constitute the only way for us to experience its existence. One could assert that being able to perceive something is enough to define consciousness, but this definition seems incomplete without mentioning intention. Indeed, no one lives as a spectator of his or her own life, except temporarily when in a half-conscious state. When we are really conscious, we think we have control and we think of our mind not only as the place from which we perceive the world, but also as the source of our decisions, the permanent inflection of the future with our volition. Again we can say that these decisions apply to a material content and are performed through mental representations of our acts built by our brain. It is not obvious that free will exists, and I will not discuss that question here, but even though free will was an illusion, intention would remain a central phenomenal aspect of our consciousness we would have to deal with. Let’s consider that it exists as a hypothesis. The possibility to replace this assumption with the one that only the sensation of free will exists will still remain as an option in further discussions. The second fundamental property of consciousness is the ability to act voluntarily on the material world – or its sensation. The irreducibility of consciousness Perception and action on the world seem to be very distinct properties at first sight, but they apply to the same material world, and the more we look inside our mind, the less they are distinguishable. Who could say to what extent we perceive our thoughts and to what extent we choose them? ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1030 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind There seems to be attention inside intention. Making a decision could be described as perceiving the idea corresponding to this decision, while moving away from our mind – or "forgetting" – concurrent ideas. There is also intention inside attention. When listening to an orchestra, I am able to focus on a specific instrument and the others will move to the background, and when I look at an ambiguous picture or at a cloud which can be interpreted as an image in different ways, I can decide which image I want to see in it. Action and perception are also, to some extent, mutually exclusive: contemplation is incompatible with doing something attentively and conversely, when I am focused on a task, I don’t perceive my environment with as much attention as I usually do. Perception and action seem to be different aspects of the same movement, which Bergson called the stream of consciousness. This movement is what being is all about: perceiving and acting at the same time, and remarkably, it is a uniquely integrated process. I am not someone else nor an aggregate of several distinct consciousnesses; I am one person, myself and only myself. The third fundamental property of consciousness is to be one single irreducible entity mixing action and perception into the same movement. It is important to notice that regardless of its unity, the frontiers of consciousness are not clearly defined. As John Searle (1992) noted, our attention always has a center and a background, and its exact bounds cannot be exactly defined. This is a paradox of consciousness: to be single and irreducible but at the same time not to have clear frontiers. To counter criticism, I shall also specify that the uniqueness of our consciousness does not refer to anything like the representation of self identity, just as acting on the material world does not refer to any subsequent story-telling of our acts and motivations, which requires advanced capabilities such as memory and reasoning, but to something more spontaneous and unspeakable, something like "living the moment." Neuroscience could discover that the representation of self and the story of its actions are subject to confabulations and illusions – actually it has done this. This does not affect at all the very fundamental fact that the subject and perceiver of these illusions is experienced as single. Consciousness and the arrow of time Actually there is a difference of nature between perception and action. Perception is always perception of the past – we see marks from the past – whereas action is directed toward the future. This distinction leads us to a property of consciousness I have not discussed yet, because it seems too obvious to be discussed, which is that consciousness is located in the present. But a more appropriate formulation would be: the present is the moment of my consciousness. This is indeed the only way to define the present: the moment when I am conscious. Moreover, the only way to define the past is: the direction of my perception, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1031 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind including the perception of my memories, and what I cannot act on, whereas the only way to define the future is: the direction of my actions and what I cannot perceive. Following Whitehead (1920), we can consider that our present is not instantaneous but has a thickness, and just as consciousness, its frontiers are not clearly defined. It seems to us that something like a common present exists and is shared by us, other people and our environment, and we will have to deal with that question later, but until that time, we can rely on this egocentric definition of time. Stream of consciousness can now be defined more precisely: it is a process that transforms the immediate future into immediate past in a single integrated movement, mixing action and perception together. The flow of this stream is not under our control; we cannot stop it or make it go faster. We cannot stop being – or as Sartre said, we are condemned to be free. However, the act of being conscious is tightly related to the flow of time. This will be the fourth fundamental property of consciousness: being a stream from the past to the future and hence defining its own present. Now we have a complete definition of the essence of consciousness which is not limited to consciousness as we know it as human beings but corresponds to what we call being conscious in its more generic and fundamental aspects. Being conscious is perceiving and acting voluntarily on the material world in a single irreducible movement that follows the stream of time; consciousness is the starting point for defining everything else, from the material world to the stream of time itself. 2. Consciousness and Materialism Emergence and holism Now that we have a generic definition of consciousness, let’s tackle a more difficult question: how can such an entity exist in a material world? The first observation is that human consciousness arises only in some specific conditions, basically inside the brains of human beings. This observation leads us to the concept of emergence, which states that an entity – here, consciousness – is present in some objects at a certain level – the brains – but not in its components. Following Mark Bedeau (1997), there are two ways of understanding emergence: • Weak emergence, for which emergent properties are only substitutes for a more complex description, such as heat is a substitute for the kinetic energy transfer of several particles; • ISSN: 2153-8212 Strong emergence, also referred to as holism, in which case the emergent properties somehow "appear" at a certain level without any causal explanation. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1032 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind We have to reject holism, not because it is necessary non-existent, but because it is nothing more than a failure to find a naturalistic explanation for a phenomenon. Holism is arbitrary; since it implies acausality, it does not tell us why or when a property appears. As long as no other explanation is needed, I will assume that we are fully part of the material world, thus causally reducible to our material constituent, because this is the hypothesis which requires the fewest presuppositions. Besides, stating that our consciousness is material is not particularly restrictive: the only limitations to that statement can be found in the way we consider matter. Let us assume, then, that human consciousness is a causally emergent property of the brain. Consciousness as a property of matter The difficulty faced here is that the fundamental properties of consciousness – perception and action on the material world – cannot be thought of as emergent properties. Indeed, it is not conceivable to find any "composition of different material systems" that would lead to the apparition of "subjective perception of something," nor does it make sense to say that "subjective action on matter" is a "substitute for a more complex description of composites." Subjective perception and action are not substitutes for anything else; they are directly experienced as single. Visual perception, of course, can be thought of as the combination of a system that transforms photons into electric signals and another system that perceive those signals. We could then separate the latter into a subsystem that builds a visual representation from the input signals by analyzing them and another subsystem that perceives this representation. But the perception "of something" always remains as a whole in either system. The ability to perceive something is a core property that cannot be reduced into a combination of different elements. The same applies to action: choosing to move one’s arm can be thought of as an emergent property, but not the act of choosing "something" itself. Let us make this analogy: a certain type of movement, such as a circular movement, could be an emergent property of a system, but it requires the ability to move as a property of the matter of which the system is composed. Obviously the ability to move itself is too fundamental to be emergent. Perception "of something" and action "on something" are of the same kind. At this point of the discussion, if we still want to reject holism, we have to conclude that the fundamental properties of consciousness – perception and action irreducibly mixed – are properties of matter itself; or, more poetically, matter is a spiritual substance. This conception is known as panpsychism. My conclusion here is that with regards to the properties of consciousness, panpsychism is the only naturalistic alternative to holism. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1033 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind The emergence of the mind Panspychism may not be the easiest way – holism or dualism would have been much easier – because it has to account for two obvious points that seem to be in contradiction with it: • Apparently, matter is not a spiritual substance. Inert matter does not show any sign of consciousness; it obeys simple causal laws. • Our mind seems to be a macroscopic inseparable entity, but matter is always separable into smaller particles. The second contradiction is sometimes denied, in that a stone, a crystal or the oscillation of a string are macroscopic entities although they are composed of smaller particles (e.g. Tegmark, 2000). However, this point is not acceptable since those entities as a whole only exist inside the representation of an observer. They are arbitrary and nothing in them is absolutely irreducible, whereas our mind is always experienced as single, no matter what we do or think about it. Actually we can solve those contradictions if we assume other hypotheses: • There exists an aggregation property of matter by which small "spirits" can form bigger inseparable "spirits" by coalescing. • This process is realized only under specific conditions. It is especially operative inside the nervous systems of living creatures while almost non-existent in non-living matter. We can assert that inert matter seems to have no mind only because it does not benefit from the aggregation properties; therefore its "minds" are microscopic and have no substantial effect on our scale, as the average action of their fluctuations results in practically deterministic laws. Conversely, living creatures might benefit from this process to allow the emergence of a macroscopic irreducible mind. Of course, this aggregation process, the conditions of its realization and a possible link between these conditions and the other specificities of our mind, such as communication, reasoning or memory, will have to be identified more precisely. A shared ontology These considerations lead us to a conception of the material world where matter is populated with evanescent spirits that may under very precise circumstances aggregate into a bigger mind. It goes without saying that those micro-spirits cannot be compared to human consciousness. They have no memory, no cognition, no scale and no persistence. They are not "really" conscious. Besides, we know what it is to be unconscious, for example when we fall asleep, and recognize that there is a continuum between conscious and unconscious states. We can ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1034 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind also observe this continuum in natural species: a monkey or a dog seems more conscious than a fly or a worm. The point is: why should we put any boundary to that continuum? Why not assume consciousness is basically a property of any kind of material system, and even of matter itself, that just takes different and more or less intensive and macroscopic forms? Assuming this continuum of consciousnesses and its absence of boundary, the difference between emergentism and panpsychism lies merely in a more or less broad definition of consciousness. No doubt particles of matter are unconscious in the common sense of consciousness. Panpsychism pleads for a wider definition of consciousness – let’s call it "proto-consciousness" to avoid confusion – of which our consciousness would only be a specific and very elaborated and intensive form, involving emergent properties. I have not dealt yet with high-level aspects of consciousness. My approach so far has been upstream of them: I have tried to explain the preconditions of their existence, i.e. subjectivity itself, and this fundamental point could not have been derived from the understanding of the different functional aspects of our cognition but required a more radical approach, starting from a first-person point of view. With this approach, I reached the conclusion, which derives from materialism itself, that matter and spirit may share the same ontology but in different forms, scales and intensities. Matter exists in the same way that we exist. This common single mode of existence consists of the association of attention and intention in an irreducible stream of consciousness, tightly related to the flow of time. Our mind is thus the result of an aggregation process over these properties, which occurs inside our brain. The next step will be to study the compatibility of this conception with our knowledge of the physical world, i.e. to what extent it is possible to find the fundamental properties of consciousness and the associated aggregation process as properties of matter itself. 3. Consciousness and Physics Determinism cannot account for consciousness If one accepts my definition of consciousness – perception and action mixed in an inseparable entity and following the flow of time – one can understand easily why the mind-body problem has always been a great difficulty for past philosophers. These properties are indeed totally incompatible with everything we know about matter, at least according to the conception of it we find in classical physics. This conception of reality cannot account for our mind and subjectivity for three main reasons: • It is deterministic. Nothing such as a free will can exist. Of course, there is no problem if free will is an illusion. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1035 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind • It is reductionist. Nothing inseparable at a human scale such as our mind can exist. • It is reversible. No instant is privileged. There is no way to discriminate between past and future – except statistically through entropy – and no way to define the present and its thickness. Therefore, according to this view, the arrow of time is a statistical illusion. As indicated above, free will is also an illusion: everything was decided at the origin of the universe. Finally, present and consciousness itself must be illusions, too, because nothing is irreducible and no moment is privileged. But if our mind itself is an illusion, one could ask: for whom exactly is it an illusion? This conception of materialism is contradictory because it denies consciousness, whereas this model is itself produced by our consciousness. Unless one opts for an epiphenomenal dualism to explain his/her existence, which would leave consciousness practically unexplained, assuming that the representation of the world offered by classical physics describes reality itself in a sufficient way to account for consciousness leads to absurdity. Quantum physics Fortunately the description of reality offered by classical physics is not accurate. A very different reality was discovered with quantum physics in the inner foundation of our whole material world: the elementary particles. Quantum physics is today the most accurate description of matter in our possession. It cannot be indifferent to the project of building an ontology, and especially a panpsychist ontology. Let’s review briefly the content of the theory. In quantum physics, any set of particles can be represented as a wave, called the “wave function”, which can be described as a superposition of simple states. There are several equivalent ways of describing a single wave as a superposition, each corresponding to an observable characteristic of the particle: its speed, position, energy, and these descriptions are mutually incompatible – which means that a simple state for one description is a superposition of states for another one and vice versa. The quantum theory simply tells us how the wave function evolves with time. Measuring a particle consists of preparing its environment so that a particular description of its wave function, i.e. a particular observable characteristic, is favored. During the measurement process, the state of the particle is projected from a superposition into a single state for the favored description. This projection is random, with probabilities depending on the weight of the simple state inside the former superposition. When particles interact with each other, they become entangled – or coherent – which means that they share the same inseparable wave-function, for which each simple state is a combination of characteristics for every particle. Practically, this results in some ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1036 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind correlations between the measured characteristics of different particles or, one might say, several particles "sharing the same randomness." Entanglement is non-local and the correlations can be observed whatever the distance in time and space between entangled particles. Entanglement disappears over interactions with the environment: the possible entanglements are then so numerous that it is virtually impossible for a system to remain itself coherent. This is known as the decoherence phenomenon. The physical existence of the wave function prior to the measurement is attested to by correlations and interferences between the superposed states, which have statistically measurable effects, whereas the existence of its collapse is attested to by the obviousness that only a single state is ever measured on a particle: the wave function collapse, while not being really part of the theory, is necessary to account for our empirical measurements. The exact nature of the wave-function collapse is subject to interpretations. Whether this collapse is a physical process, an heuristic one or even an illusion remains unclear. Practically, an external observer can describe a measurement process as the entanglement of an experimenter, an apparatus and the observed system, without any collapse until he/she actually interacts with the system. The wave function collapse as a unitary act of consciousness Following this brief summary, we can see that quantum physics offers all the properties needed to account for consciousness: • Inseparability: reductionism is only a good approximation on a large scale. On a smaller scale and for very short durations, systems are often inseparable because of entanglement. • Indeterminacy: determinism is only a good approximation on a large scale, due to the law of large numbers. At a microscopic level, matter’s behavior is fundamentally random. • Irreversibility: though physical laws are still reversible in quantum physics, the wave function collapse is an irreversible process. It appears that the wave function collapse crystallizes all previously discussed fundamental aspects of consciousness. Indeed, this process mixes perception and action in a single movement: it is involved for an observer in any act of perception of the material world, and it modifies the state of the observed particle in a fundamentally unpredictable way by projecting it on a simple state. Following a particular definition of free will for which the state of an entity cannot be reduced to a function of the information available to that entity, Conway and Kochen (2006) recently demonstrated that elementary particles do have free will. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1037 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind The wave function collapse is also an irreducible process: it applies to a whole system of entangled particles in a coherent manner and thus cannot be separated into independent processes. Entanglement plays the role of an aggregation process relative to the wave function collapse. Last but not least, the wave function collapse shares the same relationship with time as consciousness. Nonetheless, it is temporally asymmetrical and can differentiate a past and a future direction, but its exact moment is unknowable from outside the system. Indeed, the only way to know if the phenomenon has occurred is to measure a system, thus provoking the phenomenon itself. The same could be said about the present: if we want to know if an event is present, we have to observe it, and if we do, it is indeed a present event. In that sense, the moment of the wave function collapse can be understood as the subjective "present" of the system it applies to. As we can see, the wave function collapse features all the characteristics of proto-consciousness: it is irreducible and mixes perception and action on the world according to the flow of time. If not a genuine physical process, the wave function collapse appears to be the description of a unitary act of proto-consciousness. Free will and randomness If the wave-function collapse is to be assimilated with an act of consciousness, then intention lies in the randomness of the collapse. It is often objected that randomness cannot be identified with free will, but this is untrue. The confusion comes from the common conception of randomness as something meaningless and blind – in the sense that we say "I don't make decisions randomly" – whereas from a scientific point of view, it should only be considered as something unpredictable and outside our knowledge, which is precisely supposed to be the case for free will from an external point of view. It is important to make a distinction between two types of randomness, which are two different ways for something to be unknown: the epistemic and the ontological ways. The epistemic way means that something is practically out of the extent of our knowledge because of the situation, but not by principle. The ontological way means that it is fundamentally unknowable. The randomness of quantum physics is of the latter nature. It is an intrinsic ontological randomness. We could call it transcendent, as it lies beyond the possibility of a complete description. Only an ontological randomness might be identified with a genuine free will. A common objection to this identification is that having some probabilities associated with possible events is in contradiction with a free will. However, any system has an a posteriori statistical distribution, even when every single event is unpredictable. In the case of free will, statistical predictions can play the role of propensities affecting the will. This only ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1038 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind implies that our free will is not omnipotent but has some causes that affect it – which we knew already. Another way to say this is to reverse the question: what kind of model of the manifestation of free will from an external point of view could we establish if not a random one? Randomness and free will are objectively indistinguishable. We usually distinguish between them by assuming that creatures that look like us, such as animals and other humans, do have a free will like ours (Searle, 1992). In other worlds, we talk about free will when something unpredictable is associated with a supposed subjectivity, whereas we talk about randomness when it is supposedly not. Consequently, if the wave function collapse describes an act of consciousness associated with a material perception, its randomness is not "blind" anymore and can be identified with free will. 4. A Quantum Ontology The instantiation of objective reality A close look at our physical knowledge leads to the conclusion that the wave function collapse can clearly be identified with stream of consciousness, and that entanglement can be identified with an aggregation process that would possibly allow the emergence of macroscopic minds. The only problem left is to understand how this emergence would occur inside our brain. In this section, however, I will put this problem aside to focus on ontological concerns. The moment of the wave function collapse is unknowable and understanding its exact nature is today a great challenge in the interpretation of quantum physics, known as the measurement problem. I will not enter the debate here, as it would bring us too far. Let us simply say that just as we believe the present is not only attached to our consciousness but exists in the outside world, we can reasonably assume that the wave function collapse occurs in the physical world, not merely through our conscious perception. Incidentally, we must admit that subjectivity is itself a property of matter. Let us assume that the wave function collapse occurs somehow through material interactions. This assumption is a clue for understanding how an objective reality and the appearance of an absolute present emerge. Indeed, a collapse can thus be understood as an instantiation of an inter-subjective reality shared by different interacting systems; on a more global scale, the sum of these processes can be thought of as the continuous creation of a common present. This view is consistent with the theory of special relativity, which states the locality of time and the nonexistence of an absolute present and is best described by the relational interpretation of quantum physics (Rovelli, 1996). According to this interpretation, the wave-function does not describe the absolute state of a system but rather its state relatively ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1039 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind to an observer. The collapse is the consequence of the observer interacting with the system. By implication, the illusion of an absolute present and an objective reality would be a macroscopic approximation emerging from and reinforced by the continuous material interactions, just as determinism and separability are emerging at a macroscopic level – an approximation so close to certainty on our scale that it would be insane not to believe in the existence of an objective reality. Decoherence is the process by which superposed states become undetectable. The only objective evidence we have for a superposition of state is the presence of interferences between states that have a statistical impact on the result of future measurements. Those interferences disappear with decoherence through interactions of a system with its environment. Decoherence is a measure of the impossibility to go back to a previous state where different alternative realities would still be observable. Taking the relational interpretation seriously, this can be understood as a measure from an external observer of the probabilities that the wave function collapse actually occurred inside a system. According to this view, the wave-function collapse is a collective process by nature, which arises from interactions. The same could be said about consciousness: being conscious is being immersed in an environment and interacting with it. The quantum ontology By comparing the wave function collapse with the stream of consciousness, I am suggesting that a "shared ontology" of mind and matter is compatible with and strongly supported by our knowledge of the physical world. Reasoning from the prerequisites of consciousness in a material world actually led to an exact description of the properties of the wave function collapse. Unsurprisingly, a possible link between consciousness and quantum physics has been considered as a strong hypothesis by many thinkers, including Hameroff and Penrose (1996), Beck and Eccles (1992) and Stapp (2007). It has been suggested that attempting to establish such a link creates two problems out of one. Obviously, the contrary is closer to the truth: we can make only one problem out of two, the measurement problem and the mind-body problem, by realizing that they are both different aspects of the same question, applied either to matter in general or to human beings in particular, and that question is: what is it to be and, more precisely, what is the relationship between the being and its objective manifestation. It is actually the archetypal question of ontology. That question cannot be fully answered, but we can enhance the ontology proposed here with the help of quantum physics. This physics teaches us that the state of a system, which is the part of it subject to causal laws, is not a complete description of the behavior of that system but rather a probabilistic description of its possible manifestations. The wave function collapse, a random and unknowable process, must be added to the theory to account for the empirical behavior of matter. We can interpret this incomplete aspect of the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1040 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind naturalistic description as the fact that existence is not only the causal expression of a passive state, but also an act which holds an acausal component: the act of being. This fact applies to any material system through the quantum properties and incidentally to human beings and their consciousness. This conception comes very close to the philosophy of Whitehead (1920), according to whom the notions of substance, matter and object are merely abstractions, whereas nature is fundamentally made up of events. The act of being is an act of manifestation to the outer world, an act of perception and the instantiation of a shared reality. It is anchored in the stream of time. What we are cannot be totally known nor induced from our physical state; it is transcendent. Being is continuously bringing something new into the world by selecting the immediate future. That is what the present is about and also the reason our future does not exist yet. Nonetheless, the wave function collapse exists only because the wave function exists; analogously, being is only possible through a material existence subject to causal laws which determines our propensities and which is the root of our persistence and continuity, i.e. the part of us which is accessible to scientific knowledge. In that sense, existence is a constant dialogue between material determinism and the spiritual act of being. A physical definition of consciousness A difficulty arises with this ontology, which is to define what exactly a "system" is and to make that definition objective. Indeed, entanglement among particles is everywhere and is usually not a pure entanglement: particles are generally in a mixed entangled/separable state. In that sense, the world is a big soup of entangled beings who can never really be dissociated from each other but are never fully entangled. If this is so, how can we account for our own identity? There are two conditions for the emergence of an objective "system" that would develop an identity: • The system must be rather independent from its environment. We must be able to distinguish between it and the environment if we want to identify it as an entity. • The system must be inseparable. A composition of systems is arbitrary, it depends on an observer who chooses to put independent systems together and decree that they form a larger system. Being should not depend on any observer. We can thus expect from a conscious system that it will be strongly entangled and inseparable, while not being strongly entangled with its environment. This is actually a more elaborated definition of consciousness, which is nonetheless far less restrictive than what we usually understand by consciousness. Remarkably, this definition is the exact counterpart of the former subjective definition of consciousness proposed ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1041 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind above, based on its fundamental properties, because such a system has exactly the same properties: it is indeed an irreducible entity that mixes perception and action on the world. Instead of having a definition in terms of abstract properties, we now have a physical definition of consciousness through the concept of entanglement. The boundaries of consciousness We can explain why inert matter is unconscious from that definition. Inert matter is always separable into smaller composites and its constitutive particles might not be sufficiently separable from their environment. Only certain types of coherent systems can really be conscious. The challenge is to understand the processes that allow their existence. What is remarkable with this definition is that it implies that the frontiers and intensities of consciousness are variable and cannot be precisely defined. Being conscious is not something binary: an entity is more or less conscious and its consciousness is more or less extended. This imprecise aspect is coherent with human consciousness as we experience it and with what Searle calls the background, as well as with the continuum of conscious states that we can observe in the nature, from the worm to the monkey. Theoretically, we could define an "index of consciousness," which would be the ratio between the inner entanglement of a system and its entanglement with its environment. At this point, the "hard problem of consciousness," so-called by David Chalmers, has turned into a much easier one. Assuming the ontology proposed here, we can explain why we have subjective experiences from the fact that matter is a spiritual substance in itself. Only our macroscopic coherence remains unexplained. 5. A Theory of Mind Chaotic systems From the physical definition of consciousness proposed above, the mind-body problem can be reduced to the question of understanding how the brain can develop a persistent quantum entanglement that is sufficiently separable from its environment, despite decoherence, and why this does not occur in other structures. This question has already been addressed by philosophers and physicians and different solutions have been proposed, for example by Hameroff and Penrose (1996). Those solutions are often judged as not convincing, as either too speculative or questionable: it is a well-known fact that quantum aspects of matter do not exist beyond the level of elementary particles and it may seem impossible to explain our mind, which is a macroscopic system, with quantum physics, which applies only at the microscopic level, on ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1042 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind a million of million time smaller scale. After all, even very small entities such as proteins can be roughly described in a classical manner. This section will aim at giving some hints on how to go beyond those common objections to the quantum mind hypothesis while not entering too far in speculation. In fact, the idea that quantum effects are non-existent on a large scale is mainly untrue: our world is definitely a quantum world. There are two main arguments that support the idea of non-existence of quantum effects: • Microscopic fluctuations have no impact on a large scale because they are too small; • Entanglement and superposition of states do not exist on our scale because decoherence is too fast. The first argument applies only to linear dynamics. Chaotic systems, which are characterized by positive and negative feedback loops, are non-linear systems which show an exponential sensitivity to initial conditions, often referenced as the "butterfly effect," which means, loosely speaking, that fluctuations do not cancel each other out as they do in a linear system, but are instead added to each other and amplified over time. However small a fluctuation is, it will finally affect the global state of the system. That is why such systems are unpredictable. The fluctuations that cause a chaotic system to be unpredictable are certainly not all quantum fluctuations, and include impulses from the environment as well, but in fact, all quantum fluctuations may have an influence on the global system by slightly causing it to drift. This drift is exponential with time: for a macroscopic system, the necessary time to observe the effect of an atomic-scale fluctuation is only twice the necessary time to observe the effect of, say, the movement of a living cell. We must acknowledge that linear systems are very particular, and most of our world’s behavior is ruled by non-linear processes. This includes, of course, living organisms. Quantum chaos The effect of quantum fluctuations on a large scale is not very important as long as those fluctuations are mutually independent. Without any coherence, they can be considered as just noise. This observation leads us to our second argument, which states that entanglement is non-existent at the macroscopic level because decoherence is too fast for an entanglement to persist more than a few billionths of second at a normal temperature and for macroscopic systems. This non-existence is supposed to apply to brain processes as well, as Tegmark (2000) has showed. Entanglement is not something that can be easily measured on complex systems, but this assumption is based on strong theoretical ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1043 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind considerations supported by experiments. At first sight, this simple observation ruins any idea of a brain maintaining an entanglement. However, recent researches tend to tell a different story. It was discovered that a microscopic algae can use quantum coherence for light harvesting at ambient temperature (Collini, ..., 2010). It has also been discovered that an electric superconducting circuit can violate bell’s inequality, which means that the electric current is in a superposition of entangled states at a macroscopic level (Ansmann, …, 2009). These phenomena may be better understood in the light of other recent studies in the field of quantum computers, which show that chaotic systems on an atomic scale, which are called quantum chaos, can generate and maintain a persistent entanglement despite decoherence. Entanglement is therefore considered to be the signature of quantum chaos (Chaudhury, 2009, Kubotani, 2003). We can figure it out intuitively as an effect of positive and negative feedback inside the chaotic system, both responsible for constantly enhancing the entanglement and maintaining it in an indistinguishable state for a macroscopic measurement, hence preventing this superposition from collapsing through decoherence. Another possible explanation is the existence of a Zeno-effect occurring because of the feedback loops involved or, loosely speaking, because the system constantly measures itself. As suggested by Stapp (2007), such an effect could possibly maintain entanglement. It would seem from these observations that a good candidate for a system able to generate a consciousness would be a chaotic system that operates on an electric field – because electrons are very light and indistinguishable particles subject to non-local behaviors – and whose feedback loops are at a quantum level. The neuron and the brain The evolution of our brain, which is responsible for the evolution of our perceptions and behavior, is ruled by a very complex neuron network in which neurons communicate via stimulating and inhibiting electric signals. Each neuron acts like a transistor that sums up its input signals: if they are high enough, the neuron will enter a firing state, propagate a signal, then go back to its resting state. That is apparently what commands everything we feel and do: millions and millions of signals propagating inside our brain each second through a complex network. The first important observation is that neurons are chaotic systems on a very small scale, which makes their firing partially unpredictable (Aihara, 2008). The cell membrane of a neuron, which is a few dozen of atoms thick, generates an electric potential maintained by ionic streams. The neuron firing consists of the propagation of an inversion of this potential caused by positive feedback when the potential exceeds a threshold value. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1044 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind The membrane potential of a neuron is a chaotic system of electrons and the feedback involved is on a quantum scale. All of this makes of the neuron a very good candidate for being a quantum chaos system able to generate a constantly entangled electric field. The second observation is that the brain itself is a very complex and structured chaotic system with many feedback loops. A single neuron firing or not can completely change its whole evolution in a mid-range time interval. In summary, our brain is a hierarchical composition of chaotic systems down to the quantum scale, one being the elementary unit of the other. By recurrence, the brain could itself be understood as a macroscopic quantum chaos system, generating and maintaining an entanglement of its electric field, at least in the more active areas of its network, and this theory would explain our consciousness. Is this theory compatible with other theories of consciousness suggested by neuroscience? It is coherent with the fact, attested by researches, that consciousness is not located in one specific part of the brain but rather a matter of coherence among different modules. Edelman and Tononi proposed a model where consciousness is identified with a dynamic core of active neurons interacting through many fast and reentrant connections (Edelman & Tononi, 2000). They proposed a measure of conscious integration based on entropy, which makes it possible to determine the extent of this dynamic core. The measure is higher when a set of neurons share more signal together than with other neurons. Remarkably, entropy is also a measure of entanglement, and this rule becomes identical to our former physical definition of consciousness when applied to any quantum system. It is attested that fast and reentrant neural connections features a high sensitivity to initial conditions. Assuming that such connections are also conducive to the transmission of an entanglement between the electric fields of different neurons, the dynamic core suggested by Edelman and Tononi would indeed be a conscious system according to our physical definition of consciousness. As we can see, the theory of mind I propose does not contradict other neuroscience models of consciousness but is supported by them and complements them with an ontological approach. Our consciousness as the driver of a chaotic system The chaotic nature of our brain, refined with the notion of dynamic core, provides a simple explanation of why consciousness arises inside animal's brain and nowhere else: in fact, no other natural system provides such a mechanism for transmitting a potentially entangled electric field between different cells in a chaotic way. The study published by Tegmark, which claims to prove that the brain should be considered a classical system, shows calculations of decoherence rates for the firing processes of neurons, which imply that a neuron cannot be in a superposed firing/resting state. This result is quite obvious: no one would suspect such a process involving millions of particles to be in a quantum superposition. However, the assumption that the firing/resting state of every neuron is objective and measurable does not actually contradict the possibility that ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1045 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind the electric field of the brain is in an entangled state, as long as this entanglement remains non-observable beyond a certain scale. Decoherence indeed occurs when the superposed states of a system becomes sufficiently distinct from each other. Consequently, as long as the superposed states of an electric field are indistinguishable – i.e. all compatible with the same macroscopic state, – they will not collapse. Inside the quantum chaos system formed by our brain, such a global entanglement could be constantly regenerated and transmitted among neurons and would still deeply influence its global evolution, particularly by affecting the resting/firing states of indecisive neurons. Following this conception, we can understand our mind as the constant measurement and inflection of the state of the chaotic system formed by the electric field of our brain and immersed in a sensory environment. The chaotic nature of the brain is the key to understanding why the evolution of our thoughts are determined by our memories, personalities and environment and hence partly predictable in a short-term range – as Benjamin Libet's experiences (1985) attest – whereas we still feel we can affect them with our volition. Indeed, the deterministic aspects of our mental states play the role of an attractor, in the sense given by the theory of chaos: they imply a reliable short-term predictability, which can be conceived as propensities, but because a fractal attractor is subject to bifurcations on any scale, it is constantly influenced by microscopic fluctuations, in this case the effect of our volition. The delay for these fluctuations in affecting the macroscopic level may be related to our subjective perception of duration, as corroborated by the model of Edelman and Tononi. We can infer, consistent with neuroscience, that the most deterministic and computational processes of our minds, such as face or word recognition, which are mostly unconscious, are also the ones that are less subject to a sensitivity to fluctuations, and that learning, by reinforcing some neuron connections, also reduces this sensitivity, making processes less subject to an inflection by our volition, and less conscious. This simple consequence undermines the computational conception of consciousness. From an experimental point of view, consciousness can be conceived as the residual unpredictability in the evolution of our brain, at the level of its global coherence. In that sense, cognitive sciences, by identifying the predictable mechanisms of our brain, are not the sciences of consciousness but rather the sciences of our unconscious. Unsurprisingly, they tend to reduce the domain of our consciousness, but we can be confident that an irreducible residue will always remain. Conclusion A theory of mind should focus firstly on our subjectivity, because this is what comes first: any third-person assumption has its foundations in a first-person experience. Paradoxically, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1046 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind the objective representation of the world built by science is only possible through the exclusion of subjectivity, thus giving rise to the mind-body problem. A solution to this problem will only be found inside an ontology that encompasses the first-person and the third-person perspectives, i.e. the being and its manifestation. That is what I have tried to construct here. I defined consciousness subjectively as the association of perception and action in a single and irreducible movement. I showed that these fundamental properties cannot be emergent and must be properties of matter itself. I identified them with the quantum properties of matter and this led us to a quantum ontology of mind and matter and to a physical definition of consciousness based on entanglement that can account for our subjectivity and its boundless aspects, for the objective world and for the continuum of states between consciousness and unconsciousness. Finally I gave some hints on how and why consciousness appears specifically inside the nervous systems of living creatures and I showed the accuracy of the description of our mind as the driver of a chaotic system. It appears that despite frequent criticism of approaches to the mind-body problem that involve quantum physics, the only naturalistic alternative to dualism or holism is to take into consideration the deep changes brought by this physics to our conception of the world. Moreover, it is possible to go beyond the common objections to quantum mind, and as I have suggested, this approach is coherent with neuroscience models of consciousness and supported by scientific observations and philosophical considerations. These discussions lead to further questions, the first category of which would be how we could eventually support or disprove these hypotheses through experiment. Different approaches may be foreseen, such as seeking a violation of Bell's inequalities in the electric fields of the brain or of a single neuron, formalizing the proposed definition of consciousness and studying its correspondence with neuroscience models of consciousness or studying further the relationships between chaos and entanglement. The second category concerns eventual philosophical and epistemological implications of the interpretation of quantum physics, the measurement problem and its tight relation with time and with the objectification of reality, as well as further considerations of consciousness and the nature of qualia, which has only been touched upon in this paper. Finally we could consider more speculative investigations, derived from panpsychism, of an eventual role of entanglement in human communication, psychology, social mechanisms or in the genesis and organization of life. References Aihara K. (2008), "Chaos in neurons", Scholarpedia 3(5):1786. http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Chaos_in_neurons Ansmann M., Wang H., Bialczak R. C., Hofheinz M., Lucero E., Neeley M., O'Connell A. D., Sank ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 1027-1047 1047 Ruyant, Q. Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind D., Weides M., Wenner J., Cleland A. N. & Martinis J. M. (2009) "Violation of Bell's inequality in Josephson phase qubits", Nature 461, 504-506 Beck, F., & Eccles, J. (1992) "Quantum aspects of brain activity and the role of consciousness", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 89, 11357-11361. Bedeau M.A. (1007), "Weak emergence", Philosophical Perspectives, vol. 11 Chaudhury S., Smith A., Anderson B. E., Ghose S. & Jessen P. S. (2009) "Quantum signatures of chaos in a kicked top", Nature 461, 768-771 Collini, E., Wong, C. Y., Wilk, K. E., Curmi, P. M. G., Brumer, P. & Scholes, G. D. (2010) "Coherently wired light-harvesting in photosynthetic marine algae at ambient temperature", Nature, 463, 644-647 Conway, J. & Kochen, S. (2006) "The free will theorem", Foundations of Physics 36 (10): 1441. http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0604079 Edelman, G. & Tononi, G. (2000) A Universe of Consciousness: How Matter Becomes Imagination, (Basic Books) Hameroff, S. & Penrose, R. (1996) Orchestrated Objective Reduction of Quantum Coherence in Brain Microtubules: The "Orch OR" Model for Consciousness Kubotani H., Den M. (2003) "Entanglement generation by the mixing property in a quantum non-linear system", Physics Letters A 319, 5-6 Libet, B. (1985) "Unconscious cerebral initiative and the role of conscious will in voluntary action", Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8:529-566. Rovelli, C. (1996) "Relational Quantum Mechanics", International Journal of Theoretical Physics 35; 1996: 1637-1678; http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9609002 Schrödinger, E. (1974), Mind and matter (Cambridge University Press) Searle, J. (1992), The rediscovery of mind Stapp H.P. (2007), Mindful Universe: Quantum Mechanics and the Participating Observer (Springer) Tegmark, M. (2000) "The importance of decoherence in brain processes", Phys. Rev. E 61, 4194–4206, http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9907009 Whitehead, A. N. (1920), The concept of nature ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com

738 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Article Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Graham P. Smetham* Abstract The existence of the irrational numbers indicates that reality is not a structure of inherent existence; it is a structure within emptiness. In other words it is because of the background fluid and indeterminate nature of emptiness that any reality can function at all, a remarkable insight on the part of Buddhist philosophy dramatically verified by quantum physics. And this ultimately ‗empty‘ nature is revealed by the very fact that such fluidly precise and yet in a sense ungraspable conceptual procedures have to be employed within mathematical analysis. If both the realm of mentality and physicality emerge from a deeper level of universal Mindnature then it is surely not such a great mystery that mathematics, itself a product of mind, produces the conceptual patterns generated and followed by the ‗physical‘ functioning of reality. Keywords: mathematics, emptiness, illusion, mind, Gödel, Penrose. In his magnum opus The Road to Reality Roger Penrose, after the obligatory brief introductory description of how our bewildered ancestors conceived the functioning of the universe to be due to the activities of gods, tells us that they needed to: …discover how to disentangle the true from the suppositional in mathematics. A procedure was required for telling whether a given mathematical assertion is or is not to be trusted as true.1 Penrose‘s basic viewpoint is that there is an ‗objective‘ sphere of Platonic mathematical truth, a realm of logical and mathematical precision which ‗exists‘ independently of individual human minds. He presents this pristine realm of crystalline mathematical certitude as an ideal sphere of perfect precision and his invocation of this ethereal mansion of mathematical rectitude is striking: It tells us to be careful to distinguish the precise mathematical entities from the approximations that we see around us in the world of physical things. Moreover, it provides us with the blueprint according to which science has proceeded ever since. Scientists will put forward models of the world … The models are deemed to be appropriate if they survive such rigorous examination and if, in addition, they are internally consistent structures. … The required precision demands that the model be a mathematical one, for otherwise one cannot be sure that these questions have well defined answers.2 * Correspondence: Graham Smetham, http://www.quantumbuddhism.com E-mail:graham@quantumbuddhsim.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 739 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Penrose further suggests that there are three separate worlds, the physical, the mental and the platonic-mathematical. The actual interrelations between these three are that the physical gives rise to the mental, the mental somehow maps on to the platonic-mathematical and a portion of the platonic-mathematical somehow maps on the ‗physical‘. The details of this set of relations are sketchy, but the important feature for our purposes for the moment is that the realm of mathematical precision is invested with a kind of pristine purity that accords it a special status as the primary ‗road to reality.‘ This, of course, is the kind of picture that is often conveyed to students and intellectual consumers in general within our scientific culture. Mathematics is the razor sharp means of dissecting and analyzing reality with a precision so accurate that every hinge and joint of reality is analyzed and understood to an ultimate level of precision. This, of course, is to a large extent remarkably true. Although actual physical reality has rough edges, so to speak, the glittering, glinting and immaculate lineaments of the independent realm of mathematical structures and truths fits over and illuminates the functioning of actual reality with a precision that we can only gasp and wonder at. The physicist Eugene Wigner, for instance, has referred to what he considers to be the ‗unreasonable effectiveness‘ of mathematics in describing and explaining the physical world of ‗nature‘; he calls mathematics a ‗miracle‘ and ‗a wonderful gift that we neither understand nor deserve.‘3 In this paper, however, we will find that the effectiveness of mathematics may not be as mysterious as Wigner thinks. The reason that mathematics is so handy for analyzing and describing the functioning of the ‗physical‘ world is that both the ‗mental‘ and ‗physical‘ realms have an origin in a deep level of Mind which underlies all phenomena. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries it was thought by many that the precision and effectiveness of mathematics was based upon firm logical foundations. The work of Frege, Russell, Whitehead and Hilbert was aimed at elucidating and providing the logical framework which would prove that mathematics was indeed based on solid logical foundations. Russell and Whitehead set out to provide the logical foundations for mathematics in a work entitled Principia Mathematica. However, in 1931 the genius logician Kurt Gödel published "Über Formal Unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia Mathematica und Verwandter Systeme" (translated into English "On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems"). In that article, he proved for any axiomatic system that is powerful enough to describe the arithmetic of the natural numbers, the kind of axiomatic system that Russell and Whitehead wanted to develop, that such a project was not viable. Gödel‘s incompleteness theorems ended the illusion that all mathematical truths could be contained and proved within one consistent and complete axiomatic system. The mathematician Ian Stewart tells is that: After Gödel, mathematical truths turned out to be an illusion.4 We shall get to Gödel‘s theorem towards the end of this paper, but the problems for Penrose‘s rose tinted perspective regarding ideal realms of mathematical absolute pristine truth and precision actually began much further back in the historical development of mathematics. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 740 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics The fact that Penrose is well aware of the relevant issue, although he attempts to underplay its dramatic significance, is indicated in his section heading A Pythagorean catastrophe, the heading under which he discusses it. The Greek Pythagorean philosophers had a very reverent attitude towards numbers. In his excellent book Infinity: The Quest to Think the Unthinkable Brian Clegg describes their perspective as follows: The Pythagoreans considered numbers to be among the building blocks of the universe. In fact, one of the most central of the beliefs of Pythagoras‘ mathematikoi, his inner circle, was that reality was mathematical in nature.5 The Pythagorean conception of the relationship between the realm of number and reality found its exemplary image in the Pythagorean perception of the relationship between number and geometrical figures. Stewart describes the fundamental attitude to the notion of number as being embodied in the view that: They considered the number 1 to be the prime source of everything in the universe.6 And, according to Tobias Dantzig, the Pythagoreans had a corresponding conception of the geometric point: The point is unity in position‘ was the basis of Pythagorean geometry. Behind this flowery verbiage we detect the naïve idea of the line as made up of a succession of atoms as a necklace is made up of beads.7 In other words the Pythagoreans believed in the inherent existence of both numbers and geometric points. The term ‗inherent existence‘ is taken from Buddhist philosophy; it indicates a belief in structures of reality which have their own internal ‗inherent‘ reality which is completely independent of other phenomena, including the minds of perceivers. The Pythagoreans, then, believed in an inherently existent reality which was comprised of geometrical entities which were in turn comprised of ‗partless‘ ultimate points; and this sharply defined structure of the physical world was thought to be mirrored by the perfect geometric figures of geometry within which there could be found inherently existent ‗rational‘ numerical relationships. This view of the makeup of reality is crudely illustrated in fig 1. This is the famous Pythagorean 3-4-5 right-angled triangle. The sides of this triangle fit the theorem of Pythagoras that: 52 = 32 + 42 5x5 = 3x3 + 4x4 25 = 9 + 16 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 741 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Fig 1 The crucial point is that the Pythagorean view of the situation required that the number of points which fitted along the sides of the triangles should be such that the lengths could be expressed as rational numbers, which are numbers of the form: N/M (N divided by M) where N and M are whole numbers. Triangles of this form can always be scaled up so that there is a whole number of points along each side just like the 3-4-5 triangle. This Pythagorean fantasy of an inherently existent geometric atomism which was thought to be echoed in the mathematical structures which echo the geometric world held sway for a while until someone spoiled the party of Pythagorean purity by discovering something very disturbing about unit squares, which are squares which have all sides of length 1. According to Pythagoras‘s theorem the diagonal of the unit square must have a length which is the square root of 2 ( 2 ) (fig 2). The problem for the pristine purity of the Pythagorean geometrical-numerical perspective arises because it can be proved that number 2 cannot be represented as a rational number of the form M/N. The proof by contradiction that is now used for showing that 2 is not a rational number is so sweet it is worth outlining for those not familiar with it. We start by assuming that √2 is a rational number. Then we can write it √2 = M/N where M, N are whole numbers, N not zero. We additionally require that M/N is reduced to lowest terms, having no common factors, which can obviously be done with any fraction. Now by squaring both sides we get 2 = M2N2, or M2 = 2N2. So the square of M is an even number. From this it follows that M itself is also an even number. Why? Because it can't be odd; if M itself was odd, then (M x M) would be odd too because an odd number times an odd number is always odd. If M itself is an even number, then M is 2 times some other whole number, or M = 2k where k is some other number. If we substitute M = 2k into the original equation 2 = M2/N2, this is what we get: 2 = (2k) 2/N2 2 = 4k2/N2 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 742 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics 2N2 = 4k2 N2 = 2k2. This means N2 is even, from which follows again that N itself is an even number! So we have now derived a contradiction. This is because we started the analysis by assuming that M/N is reduced to the lowest terms, but it now it turns out that M and N would both be even. So √2 cannot be rational. Fig 2 For the Greeks this was a completely new kind of number, as we shall see very shortly it is a kind of non-inherently existent (using the notion of non-inherence to indicate a lack of the kind of precise boundaries which are characteristic of natural numbers), or irrational, number which has some very disturbing characteristics from the perspective of anybody who prefers numbers to come in inherently existent, or rational, flavors. The Pythagoreans were so disturbed by the shattering of their inherently existence numerical world that Proclus wrote that: It is told that those who first brought out the irrationals from their concealment into the open perished in a shipwreck to a man. For the unutterable and the formless must needs be concealed.8 For Proclus and other Greek philosophers, then, the discovery of irrational numbers opened up a view upon disconcerting vistas of ‗the unutterable and the formless‘. Within Buddhist philosophy the term employed to indicate the lack of ‗inherent existence‘ in all phenomena is ‗emptiness‘ (shunyata). This term does not indicate ‗nothingness‘ as usually understood as a complete and absolute void, it indicates, rather, no-thing-ness, an ungraspable realm of indeterminate potentiality, an indeterminate realm from which all things emerge as illusionlike temporary appearances. The Buddhist notion of ‗emptiness‘, then, is clearly connected to the twentieth century discoveries within quantum physics, as quantum physicist Vlatko Vedral says: Quantum physics is indeed very much in agreement with Buddhistic emptiness.9 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 743 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Emptiness, or shunyata, is the Buddhist concept of a fundamental non-substantial ‗empty‘ ground of potentiality which gives rise to the multitudinous productions within dualistic experience through the operation of a primordial activity of cognition. The infinite acts of primordial cognition which drive the process of dualistic reality, and form the basis for the higher level cognitive continuums of sentient beings, can be considered as internal activations of creation operators within the fundamental quantum field. And, just as the fundamental quantum field itself lacks substantiality, so too, when analyzed thoroughly, it turns out that all phenomena arising from the primordial cognitive activations within the quantum field equally lack absolute and independent substantiality. Or, as Buddhist philosophy of the Madhyamaka, the Middle Way analysis, asserts, all phenomena lack, or are ‗empty‘ of ‗inherent existence‘ (svabhava). The seemingly ‗physical‘ world within which we have our embodied being, however, seems remarkably substantial, it certainly appears to have ‗inherent existence‘. And, because the world does present such a convincing appearance of materiality and solidity, the Madhyamaka, a dazzling metaphysical deconstruction of our notions of everyday reality founded by the Indian Buddhist philosophical genius Nagarjuna in the 2nd century C.E., employs deconstructive analyses of our concepts of, and the apparent functioning of, reality in order to show the illusion-like nature of appearances.10 The process is reminiscent of an aspect of the film The Matrix wherein the minds of human beings are trapped within a vast virtual reality generated by a computer whilst their bodies are used to generate energy. The central protagonist Neo is made aware of the illusion-like nature and is thereby also becomes aware of ‗glitches‘ in the programming of the matrix. The Madhyamaka analysis displays ‗glitches‘ within the way in which we think reality functions in order to give us insight into the impossibility of our familiar notions of the functioning of the world. We too, then, can become aware of the illusion-like nature of reality. In this paper we are concerned with the glitches in our notion of mathematics as applying to and describing an inherently existent world. The irrationality of 2 and irrational numbers in general may be considered one such glitch. So what is it about the number 2 which makes it ‗unutterable‘ to the extent that uttering it invites shipwreck? The answer is, although the Greeks did not view the issue in exactly this way, that it is a number which can only be represented by an unending numerical expression. As a decimal expression we would have to write: 2 = 1.414213562373095048802168872… The … means that this expression never ends, it goes on for ever and ever, all the way to infinity, and, as Clegg tells us, infinity is: a fascinating, elusive topic. It can be like a deer, spotted in the depths of a thick wood. You will catch a glimpse of the beauty that stops you in your tracks, but moments later you are not sure if you saw anything at all. … We may then open up clear views on this most remarkable of mathematical creatures – a concept that goes far beyond sheer numbers, forcing us to question our understanding of reality.11 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 744 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics The fact that the length of the diagonal of a unit square is an irrational number means that a length of line which anyone can construct quite quickly with a ruler, pencil and right-angled triangle does not have a precise finite decimal representation. The diagonal line inside the square quite obviously has a definite end point but the decimal representation does not! As Clegg points out, this situation seriously undermines the Pythagorean conception that the innermost functioning of reality is entirely dependent on the crystalline precision of numbers: That handy Pythagoras‘ theorem about the length of sides of a right-angled triangle produces a result that is frankly devastating if you believe that the universe is driven by pure whole numbers.12 Fig 3 Just to make sure the situation is fully appreciated please refer to fig 3. We imagine that, perhaps in a special Platonic realm, we have a special quantum precision pencil which allows us to draw any fractional decimal amount at any scale approaching the quantum realm, and even descending beyond that. We also have a quantum magnifier so that we can examine the vertex of the square at which we are trying to draw in, and thereby complete, the diagonal. At every point of the decimal expansion for the number 2 we use the magnifier and pencil to draw in the next bit of the diagonal. We have been at it for eons but, although the end is in sight, it is also infinitely beyond reach. When the gap seems about to be closed, the quantumly magnified perspective shows that we are still short of the completion; whenever we draw in the next decimal bit the magnifier shows us there is still another decimal bit to go. The task seems, indeed it is, endless; in fact the task is infinitely endless! No wonder the Pythagoreans were freaked out; this is surely an absurd situation which screams implausibility. This fact of the extraordinary mismatch between the way the world seems or appears to be constructed in the everyday ‗conventional‘ world, and the way that it actually does exist under mathematical analysis, offers a beautiful illustration of the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 745 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Madhyamaka notion of the two truths - the relative, seeming, or conventional truth and the ultimate truth. As we shall see it is also an excellent analogy for, or sign of, emptiness. The definition of conventional reality is ‗an appearance within experience which satisfies as being real as long as it is not analyzed.‘ Such truths, however, are said by the Madhyamaka to be deceiving because they cannot exist in the way that they appear to. This deceptive nature is revealed when conventional truths are subjected to ‗ultimate‘ analysis. In the case of the number 2, conventional reality is represented by the drawing of the unit square with the diagonal drawn in. According to Pythagoras‘ theorem the diagonal is definitely of length 2. Not only this, but also the diagonal line can, on the conventional level, definitely be seen to have a definite length. However, a mathematical analysis, which in this case we can take to be representative of an ultimate analysis, shows that this definite and conventionally determinate length is impossible because, the diagonal line can never reach its correct extent if the attempt is made in non-infinite time periods; no matter what length is added to the end of the decimal expansion it will either overshoot, or undershoot, the end of the line. In other words, the ‗ultimate‘ mathematical analysis shows that the conventional drawing of the diagonal line must be an illusion; the line does not inherently exist even though we can draw it! This example is just one amongst an infinite number of possibilities! Another is the fundamental issue of the relationship between the diameter and the circumference of a circle; the diameter ( d ) is the distance from one side of a circle to the other across the centre, and the circumference ( c ) is the distance measured around the circle itself (fig 4). The relationship between these two distances is expressed by the equation: c = d This means that the circumference can be calculated by multiplying the diameter by the value , which is a transcendental and irrational number. Fig 4 The fact that  is an irrational number means that, like 2, it cannot be expressed as a rational number of the form M/N, although  is approximated by the rational number 22/7. And when  is expressed as a decimal it begins: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 746 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics 3.14158… and continues, we are told, until infinity. The irrational number , however, is different to 2 in a very significant respect; it cannot be expressed as a term within a finite algebraic equation of any kind, including squares or other powers of an unknown entity. If we let X, as is mathematically usual, represent an ‗unknown‘ value, then in the equation: X2 = 2 (1) which means that X multiplied by itself gives the result of 2, the ‗solution‘ is represented by: X = 2. (2) This means that 2 is the solution to, and is therefore derived from, equation (1). The fact that  can not be derived from such an equation is indicated by saying that  is a transcendental number. Clegg says of such numbers: Whereas 2, and every other irrational number that can be defined with an equation, is called algebraic to echo this property,  is far and above the best known transcendental number, the name given to irrationals that can‘t be fitted into a suitable finite equation. Just as irrational does not suggest lacking rational thought, transcendental has nothing to do with the mystical associations the word has picked up in the last few years. It merely says that the number transcends – is outside of – calculation by equation.13 Although Clegg is technically correct to attempt to undermine the notion that ‗transcendental‘ numbers might have any ‗mystical‘ connotations, from the point of view of our search for an inherently existent reality such a connection at least has a suggestive force. The fact that the details of the domain of the transcendental and irrational numbers, in relationship with the more well behaved and familiar realm of ‗natural‘ and ‗rational‘ numbers, has an affinity with the division between quantum reality and the macroscopic level of everyday life is suggested by Clegg himself: …modern considerations of infinity shake up the comfortable, traditional world in the same way that physicists suffered after quantum mechanics shattered the neat classical view of the way the world operated.14 And this attribution is correct. The determinate experienced world of dualistic appearance emerges from the quantum realm in a very similar manner to way in which the, apparently, absolute crystalline precision of the mathematical structures of meaning derive from the emergence of form from the infinite formless ‗swarming‘, as the philosopher Alain Badiou calls it15, of natural, rational, irrational, real, transcendental, transfinite, incomputable, and surreal numbers. Whether such a remarkable interpenetration and interdependence between two realms of phenomena which have such antithetical and incompatible natures, is ‗mystical‘ or not, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 747 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics however, clearly depends upon the meaning of the term ‗mystical‘. Clegg, like so many Western thinkers who do not give serious consideration to the ultimate implications of the issues they are dealing with, implicitly, and illicitly, implies that the ‗mystical‘ is allied to the notion of ‗lacking rational thought‘. A dictionary definition, however, is: Having an import not apparent to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence; beyond ordinary understanding.16 If this definition does not apply to the fact that the ultimate mode of existence of the entities that are supposed to underlie the precise geometric figures of the conventional world, actually indicate that those precise geometric figures should not be possible, then it is difficult to conceive of just what the definition could apply to! The forms of ‗ordinary understanding‘ which ‗are apparent to the senses‘ and are ‗obvious to intelligence‘, if by this we mean ordinary embodied non-analytical intelligence, are the forms of ‗inherent existence‘ which are those of what the Buddhist Madhyamaka calls the conventional, seeming reality. And it appears that it is exactly these comfortable appearances of the ordinary world which are shown by an ultimate mathematical analysis to be at least questionable, if not impossible. This situation is dramatically demonstrated by the impossibility of squaring the circle. This mathematical conundrum poses the question of whether we can take a circle of a given area ( A ) and transform it into a square of precisely the same area; we can imagine taking the appropriate four points and then pulling outwards in order to effect the transformation (fig 5). Surely everything that is conventionally ‗apparent to the senses‘ and ‗obvious to the intelligence‘ would tell us that this transformation should be no problem. An ‗ultimate‘ mathematical analysis, however, indicates that this is not the case. The number  has been shown to be definitely transcendental, so it cannot be caught within an algebraic expression. Suppose the diameter of the circle is d, then its area is: Fig 5 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 748 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics A = d And if the side of the square is s, then its area is: A = s2 And therefore, because the areas are supposed to be the same, then if the areas of the circle and square were to be the same then it would follow that: d = s2 This means that if the areas of the square and circle were to be equal then it would clearly follow that  can be expressed in an algebraic expression; but the German mathematician C. L. Lindemann, in 1882, proved that  could not be so expressed. It follows, therefore, that it is impossible to perform the transformation, precisely and ultimately, of the circle into a square of equivalent area! If we view mathematics from the point of view of inherent existence there are many such mismatches, dissonances, misalignments and so on, between the precise ultimate mathematical analysis and the functioning of the conventional realm. You may wonder how this remarkable fact is covered up, so to speak! It‘s easy; you just invoke a mystical realm of pure platonic logical reality! Here‘s what Penrose says about the strange fact that numbers like 2, irrational numbers, seem to be constructible with pencil, ruler and right-angle but cannot be finitely represented in decimal form: Nowadays, we do not worry unduly if a certain geometrical quantity cannot be measured simply in terms of rational numbers alone. This is because the notion of a ‗real number‘ is very familiar to us. Although our pocket calculators express numbers in terms of only a finite number of digits, we readily accept that this is an approximation forced upon us by the fact that the calculator is a finite object. We are prepared to allow that the ideal (Platonic) mathematical number could certainly require that the decimal expansion continues indefinitely.17 Now this appeal to ‗familiarity‘ is an extraordinarily lax, philosophically speaking, observation. Here we are, at the outset of Penrose‘s Road to Reality, by which he must surely mean ultimate reality, and at this very point we meet an extraordinary situation with regard to the nature of mathematical reality. A pencil line which, seemingly, can easily be drawn should not, from an ultimate analytical point of view, be able to be so drawn. Might this not offer us a clue as to the relationship between appearance and ultimate reality? Penrose tells us that the notion of a ‗real number is very familiar to us‘. So what does this remarkable familiarity amount to? The answer is simply that mathematicians are ‗familiar‘ with the employment of a logical fudge in order to make the situation look viable. The notion that they employ is that of a limit. This idea is enshrined in the famous paradox of Zeno regarding the possibility of crossing a definite interval when we consider the task from the point of view of traversing half of the remaining distance at each step (fig 6). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 749 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Fig 6 The problem now becomes one of finding the solution of the infinite series: Limit (which is 1) = ½ + ¼ + 1/8 + 1/16 + 1/32 + 1/64 + 1/124 + … To actually perform such a never ending task, of course, would take, well, forever; so what is needed is a piece of mathematical magic. And this is exactly what is done; a magical symbol which means, in essence, ‗do the impossible,‘ if that is we live in an inherently existent universe, was invented (fig 7). Fig 7 Now it is quite easy to show that for n = 1, 2 , 3 we have n = 1 Limit = ½ =½ n = 2 Limit = ½ + ¼ =¾ n = 3 Limit = ½ + ¼ + 1/8 = 7/8 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 750 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics and so on In fact the limit sum can, admittedly not so easily, be shown to be calculated by the formula: Limit = 1- (½)n Where (½)1 = ½; (½)2 = ¼; (½)3 = 1/8, etc. Now we can see that the bigger the value of n gets, the smaller the value of (½)n becomes. In fact the value of (½)n gets very, very small extremely quickly. When n=10, for instance, (½)n is approximately 0.001 and as n gets larger the value of (½)n becomes vanishingly small. So vanishingly small, in fact, mathematicians have simply decided to let it vanish. This decision is expressed by using another mathematical magic symbol:  (½)n = 0 n=1 This says, mathematically speaking, that if you multiply ½ by itself an infinite number of times (  ), something which is actually impossible, but we can ‗imagine‘ doing it (can we?), so to speak, then the result is nothing. This is indeed magic; we can start out with something and mathematically create nothing. This is something only the infinite can do! And because of this vanishing trick we can arrive at the desired result: Limit(n) = 1- (½) = 1- 0 = 1 This result follows as long as we accept that the imaginary process of multiplying a number which is less than 1 by itself an infinite number of times (  ) , a process which, in reality so to speak, can never be carried out, logically gives a zero result. And this kind of reasoning, the employment of procedures which actually are imaginatively precise manipulations of the imprecision of infinity; infinite imprecision tamed, as it were, to ever more infinitely precise tiny realms of imprecision, which underlies a great deal of the advanced techniques of modern mathematics. This is precisely why Ian Stewart entitled his recent book about the foundations of mathematics The Taming of the Infinite. But it all works; the extraordinary manipulation of the physical world which is embodied in modern physical science is based upon an incredibly precise, magical, mathematical sleight of mind! As Clegg says ‗there seemed to be a fudge in calculus‘18; and calculus is the fundamental mathematics of change which underlies a vast amount of modern physical theory. And this ‗fudge‘ involves a dramatic attribution of ultimate inherent existence to ultimately non-inherently existent entities: the infinitely large and the infinitesimally small. Bishop Berkeley wrote of the use of the infinitesimally small disappearing values, which were called ‗fluxions‘ in his time: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 751 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics And what are these fluxions? The velocities of evanescent increments. And what are these same evanescent increments? They are neither finite quantities nor quantities infinitely small, nor yet nothing. May we not call them the ghosts of departed quantities?19 Newton wrote that: It may be objected that there is no such thing as an ultimate proportion of vanishing quantities, inasmuch as before vanishing the proportion is not ultimate, and after vanishing it does not exist at all … But the answer is easy … the ultimate ratio of vanishing quantities is to understood not as the ratio of quantities before they vanish or after they have vanished, but the ration with which they vanish.20 But in fact, when you think about it precisely, they are ‗empty‘ entities. This is because, as Bishop Berkley indicates, they neither exist nor do they not-exist. As the Buddhist Madhyamika philosopher Bhavaviveka (1st-2nd century) indicated the ‗empty‘ character of reality is that it is: Neither existent, nor nonexistent Nor both existent and nonexistent, nor neither.21 A great deal of modern mathematics, then, is redolent of emptiness! This also means that modern mathematics is based upon irrationality, not of thought of course, but of number. Penrose‘s strategy of claiming some kind of pristine mathematical realm, within which irrationality can be tidied up, is suspect because the existence of irrational numbers clearly indicates something deeply unexpected about mathematical reality which, as we shall see, also means that they indicate something highly significant about reality in general. The Pythagorean Greeks did not organize shipwrecks for any minor inconvenience; they were reserved for the occurrence of major disruptions in their conception of reality. And the fact that they considered the discovery of the irrational numbers to be such a major disruption might not indicate ancient ignorant naivety, on the contrary it might be that they actually thought deeply about the implications for the nature of the reality they inhabited, rather than tidying them away from the nature of the reality that they thought they inhabited. The existence of the irrational numbers indicates that reality is not a structure of inherent existence; it is a structure within emptiness. As the Heart Sutra says ‗form is emptiness and emptiness is form.‘22 In other words it is because of the background fluid and indeterminate nature of emptiness that any reality can function at all, a remarkable insight on the part of Buddhist philosophy dramatically verified by quantum physics. And this ultimately ‗empty‘ nature is revealed by the very fact that such fluidly precise and yet in a sense ungraspable conceptual procedures have to be employed within mathematical analysis. In his discussion of the concept of velocity the physicist Giovanni Vignale, in his recent book The Beautiful Invisible, comments that: Scientific theories, like works of art, live in tangential realities that are conjured up by a limiting process. Starting from familiar concepts we dive into a fantastic space, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 752 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics navigate it according to certain rules, and re-emerge on the level of reality with a new concept, a new figure of thought – velocity in this case.23 However, the apparent inherent reality of the physical world misleads many scientists and philosophers to impute inherent existence to conceptual tools which, as Vignale points out, are conjured out of the ‗fantastic space‘ of conceptual imagination, and it is within these necessary conceptual ‗fictions‘ wherein physics and mathematics offer insights into the metaphysical depths of reality. Quantum physics has already given us an ‗experimental metaphysics‘24 which shows us the existentially indeterminately fluid and ‗empty‘ ground of reality, and within mathematics we can also find quantum points of dislocation, such as the irrational, undrawable line, which offer us deep insight when we know how to look. However, because of an ingrained belief in the inherent ‗physical‘ existence of our reality, an inherent existence which was always conceived of as independent of Mind, many philosophers are willing to ignore points of dislocation. Penrose, for example, clearly sees the points of dislocation but seems to be beguiled by the illusion that the universe must be inherently real in nature. Perplexed observations such as ‗but can a real world really be constructed on the basis of unreal constituents‘ can be found in many places in his works25. In fact the notion of inherent existence, the conviction that there can be completely selfenclosed, independent, self-sufficient aspects of ‗reality‘, seems to occupy a fundamental role in Penrose‘s thought: Fig 8 …an important element in the mathematician‘s common conviction that an external Platonic world actually has an existence independent of ourselves comes from the extraordinary unexpected hidden beauty that the ideas themselves so frequently reveal.26 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 753 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics This notion is enshrined in his doctrine of the three worlds (fig 8). However, once having posited these realms as being fundamentally, substantially so to speak, disconnected from one another, Penrose, unsurprisingly, runs into the three ‗profound mysteries‘ of the nature of the interconnections between the worlds. Undaunted by this crucial issue, however, Penrose presses on towards his ultimate vision of the fundamental mathematical nature of reality: How do I really feel about the possibility that all of my actions, and those of my friends, are ultimately governed by mathematical principles of this kind? I can live with that. I would, indeed, prefer, to have these actions controlled by something residing in some such aspect of Plato‘s fabulous mathematical world…27 But the conceptual dissection of reality into spheres, realms, or ‗worlds‘ that are conceived of as being absolutely distinct in nature, self-enclosed, ‗Platonic‘, sufficient unto themselves, and so on, leads automatically to incoherence exactly because aspects of reality which have nothing common which is inherent to each of them cannot possibly co-here together! What could possibly provide a ground of commonality between such seemingly disparate aspects of reality? The simple, obvious answer is that we need to see that these aspects, which have been imputed by mind as being inherently separate from each other, have a common nature already inherent within them, they are, in the last analysis, all aspects of Mind. They are actually interdependent aspects within the unitary process of Mind, and such aspects are, in actuality, neither absolutely the same, nor absolutely different: When something originates in dependence upon something else, The depender is not the same as the depended-on, Nor is it different from it.28 This of course is the realm of emptiness; it is also the realm of the transcendental numbers! When the inner contradictions generated by the kind of, inherent-existence based, approach adopted by Penrose are penetrated and resolved, the metaphysical structure of reality reveals itself as an interdependent play of Mind appearing to itself in various guises: transcendent, rational, irrational, physical… And this metaphysical perspective emerges from a rigorous investigation of the ‗empty‘ nature of mathematics. The following is a distillation of Penrose‘s ultimate musings upon ultimate reality after he has traversed his thousand page road to reality: My own position on the matter is that we should certainly take Plato‘s world as providing a kind of ‗reality‘ to mathematical notions …, but I might baulk at actually attempting to actually identify physical reality with the abstract reality of Plato‘s world. I think that Fig. 34.1 [see my fig 9] best expresses my opinion on this question, where each of the three worlds … has its own kind of reality, and where each is (deeply and mysteriously) in the one that precedes it (the worlds being taken cyclically). I like to think that, in a sense, the Platonic world may be the most primitive of the three, since mathematics is a kind of necessity, virtually conjuring its very self into existence through logic alone.29 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 754 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics In the pages following the above quote Penrose makes the following observations: …almost all the ‗conventional‘ interpretations of quantum mechanics ultimately depend upon the presence of a ‗perceiving being‘…30 And: The issue of environmental decoherence … provides us with a merely stopgap position … ‗lost in the environment‘ does not literally mean that it is actually lost, in an objective sense. But for the loss to be subjective, we are again thrown back on the issue ‗subjectively perceived – by whom?‘ which returns us to the consciousness-observer question.31 And: …the behaviour of the seemingly objective world that is actually perceived depends on how one‘s consciousness threads its way through the myriads of quantumsuperposed alternatives. In the absence of an adequate theory of conscious observers, the many-worlds interpretation must necessarily remain incomplete.32 And: As far as I can make out, the only interpretations that do not necessarily depend upon some notion of ‗conscious observer‘ … require some fundamental change in the rules of quantum mechanics…33 Fig 9 – Penrose‘s fig 34.1 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 755 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Given these observations, and others in the same vein he makes elsewhere, the only thing that can possibly keep Penrose from coming to the most obvious conclusion that it is a some kind Universal Mindnature, not an insubstantial Platonic realm, that provides the ground of the process of the universe and therefore stands at the end of his road to reality (fig 10) is his distaste for the conclusion. Penrose, however, seems to equate a non-physical mind or consciousness with unreality: …I envisage that the phenomenon of consciousness- which I take to be a real physical process, arising ‗out there‘ in the physical world.34 It seems, then, that Penrose considers that non-physical mind is far too unreal to generate itself! Something completely and absolutely different, such as mathematics, has a much better chance! But isn‘t mathematics itself a product of Mind? Is it not the product of the interaction of the subjective and objective aspects of universal Mindnature (a term which derives from Buddhist Dzogchen philosophy, it indicates a universal nondual primordial ground which is of the nature of mind), a nature which has been revealed in its objective manifestation by quantum physics? As Penrose says: If we are to believe that any one thing in the quantum formulism is ‗actually‘ real, for a quantum system, then I think that it has to be the wavefunction …35 And it would seem to be the case that the evidence is stacking up in favor of the view that the nature of the level of the quantum wavefunction is primarily a Mindnature rather than ‗physical‘ in the traditional sense. As the significant physicist Henry Stapp tells us: We live in an idealike world, not a matterlike world.‘ The material aspects are exhausted in certain mathematical properties, and these mathematical features can be understood just as well (and in fact better) as characteristics of an evolving idealike structure. There is, in fact, in the quantum universe no natural place for matter. This conclusion, curiously, is the exact reverse of the circum-stances that in the classical physical universe there was no natural place for mind.36 Indeed there are number of significant physicists moving towards a view that is consistent with Buddhist metaphysical perspectives that the ultimate nature of reality can only be described in terms of Mindnature (Yogachara/Chittamatra – Mind-Only, Dzogchen – Great Perfection)37. Such a move in our conception of reality, of course, requires a new understanding of the concept of ‗physical‘, Stapp for instance has indicated that he now employs this term to indicate those aspects of reality which are measurable and he does not imply with its use the existence of a Cartesian type ‗material‘ reality38. Many physicists and philosophers, however, seem to remain imprecise and confused in their use of the term. In his paper Nondual Quantum Duality Stapp has indicated that quantum theory now requires us to conceive of reality as having a metaphysical structure which involves a deep Mind-like nondual ground which gives rise to the dualistic realm of experience: … in contrast to the application to classical mechanics, in which the physically described aspect is ontologically matterlike, not mindlike, in quantum mechanics ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 756 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics the physically described part is mindlike! So both parts of the quantum Cartesian duality are fundamentally mindlike. Thus quantum mechanics conforms at the pragmatic/operational level to the precepts of Cartesian duality, but reduces at a deep ontological level to a fundamentally mindlike nondual monism.39 Fig 10 This view of the interdependent genesis of the two realms of dualistic manifestation; the realm of ‗physicality‘, which is the objective aspect of the dualistic manifestation from the deeper, unitary, implicate (to use a term for levels of non-duality used by physicist David Bohm) dimension of Mindnature, and the subjective realm of individuated ‗mentality‘ solves a crucial puzzle that has bothered many physicists and mathematicians. Eugene Wigner, for instance, referred to what he considered to be the ‗unreasonable effectiveness‘ of mathematics in describing and explaining the physical world of ‗nature‘; he called mathematics a ‗miracle‘ and ‗a wonderful gift that we neither understand nor deserve.‘40 However, if both the realm of mentality and physicality emerge from a deeper level of universal Mindnature then it is surely not such a great mystery that mathematics, itself a product of mind, produces the conceptual patterns generated and followed by the ‗physical‘ functioning of reality. Penrose also refers to the ‗mystery‘ of the ‗remarkable relationship between mathematics and the actual behavior of the physical world.‘41 But, when it is realized that both are manifestations from a deeper realm of Mindnature, the ‗mystery‘ disappears. The fact that individuated mind can, with a little thought on the matter, mirror its own deeper processes, the processes that underlie the appearances of ‗matter‘ in the first place; is hardly a matter which should stretch the power of our minds; it seems quite natural when you put your mind to it! ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 757 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Penrose seems desperate to avoid being forced against his better judgment, so to speak, to conclude from the weight of evidence that some kind of universal Mindnature or Consciousness underlies the process of reality and this leads him to suggest that somehow mathematics can somehow generate itself separately from mind or consciousness. ‗Mathematics‘, he says ‗is a kind of necessity, virtually conjuring its very self into existence through logic alone‘42, a formulation which seems to suggest that ‗logic‘ is somehow capable of functioning all on its own, independently of Mind or minds, a suggestion which hardly seems plausible. Implausible as it may seem, however, it is a view held by others, most notably Max Tegmark: I am a mathematical fundamentalist: I single out math as underlying the structure of the universe … I adopt the formalist definition of mathematics: it is the study of formal systems. Although this pursuit itself is of course secondary to the human mind, I believe that the mathematical structures that this process uncovers are ‗out there‘, completely independently of the discoverer.43 In this quote we immediately can see the signs of a belief in the inherent existence of mathematical structures which are conceived of as somehow independent of Mind, even though Tegmark clearly recognizes that human minds are necessary to mediate them into the world of experience. This is an example, albeit a very subtle one, of the kind of completely implausible picture of the meaningful somehow emerging from a complexity of meaningless units of mindlessness (mathematical or logical symbols are hardly meaningful without some minds being around). An amusing extreme materialist example of this is provided by Douglas Hofstadter‘s bizarre notion of a rudimentary mind arising from the machinations of a vast number of beer cans (he doesn‘t say whether they are full or empty): …beer can model of thinking or sensation … vast processes involving millions or billions or trillions of beer cans…44 It must be said at once, and with haste, however, that Penrose and Tegmark‘s depiction of the meaningful arising from the meaningless is much more, by far, sober and restrained than Hofstadter‘s unwitting parody of materialism, we would not wish the reader to think that they had been drinking at the same bar! Hofstadter, however, does offer a more mathematically oriented suggestion for his thesis of the enforced meaningful meaninglessness arising through the operation of mindless complexity. In his 1970‘s smash hit book Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, under a section heading ‗Meaningless Symbols Acquire Meaning Despite Themselves‘ Hofstadter informs us that: …a crucial part of my book‘s argument rests on the idea that meaning cannot be kept out of formal systems when sufficiently complex isomorphisms arise. Meaning comes in despite ones best efforts to keep symbols meaningless.45 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 758 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics This is Hofstadter‘s strange notion that mind and meaningfulness arise from ‗strange loops‘ of meaningless symbols. Imagine the scenario: a strange loopy professor tosses a bunch of meaningless symbols into an empty room, hoping against hope that they will behave themselves for a change and just lay about meaninglessly on the floor where they land. But, as he fearfully suspects they might do, they immediately start vigorously arranging themselves into meaningful patterns once they notice that there are some ‗sufficiently complex isomorphisms‘ between various sub-patterns that they meaninglessly fall into. Dreading that some meaningful result might be the upshot of all this meaningless activity, the professor (probably of cognitive studies) dives into the room to make his ‗best efforts‘ to ensure that the symbols remain meaningless. He battles meaningfully against the meaningless tide of mounting meaning, but to no avail and eventually gives up. He dejectedly walks away, realizing his mistake. The bunch of meaningless symbols he threw into the room actually comprised a ‗formal system!‘ He therefore makes a determined resolution never to throw a meaningless bunch of symbols which make up a formal system into a room again! Does this appear to be a meaningless jumble of symbolic drivel masquerading as meaningful? Exactly! But it faithfully highlights the meaningless nature of Hofstadter‘s proposal. Formal systems must be meaningful to some extent in order to be formal systems in the first place, so the notion of struggling to keep them meaningless is, well, meaningless! Once again it must be pointed out that Hofstadter‘s strange looped ideas represent an extreme example of the proposal that the meaningful can spontaneously erupt from pure meaninglessness, but, nevertheless, Penrose does seem to come close to some such proposal. Mathematics, he tells us, conjures ‗its very self into existence through logic alone.‘ Compare this with Hofstadter‘s description of how he conceives of a ‗Gödelian strange loop‘ being the origin of the generation of meaning from meaninglessness: …the Gödelian strange loop that arises in formal systems in mathematics (i.e. collections of rules for churning out an endless series of mathematical truths solely by mathematical symbol shunting without any regard to meanings or ideas in the shapes being manipulated) is a loop that allows such a system to ‗perceive itself‘, to talk about itself, to become ‗self-aware‘, and in a sense it would not be going to far to say that by virtue of having such a loop, a formal system acquires a self.46 This extreme presentation of the ‗self‘-generation of meaning from meaninglessness viewpoint clearly brings out the missing link in the proposed evolution of meaning from meaninglessness, the missing ingredient is, in fact, ‗meaning‘. The notion that ‗mathematical truths‘ are generated, and also recognized, ‗solely‘ by a meaningless ‗mathematical symbol shunting‘ is simply incoherent for precisely because of the meaning of the term ‗coherent‘ previously indicated concerning the meaning of the word ‗coherent‘. If two concepts are defined to be completely and absolutely devoid of significant connecting inherent qualities then to assert that one of them can arise from the other in any meaningful way is meaningless. The notion that absolutely meaningless symbols, existing in some fashion independently of, and unrelated to, human awareness, would have some kind of internal structure to make them a ‗formal system‘ is a subtle form of materialism and, like all ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 759 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics materialist explanations, it relies on an illicit investment to the units claimed to be meaningless with the meanings already invested by minds and Mind. Fig 11 – Meaningless symbols perceiving themselves! The Hofstadterian ‗beer-can‘ or ‗meaningless-symbols-only‘ model of meaning and perception illicitly, and deceptively, uses the reader‘s own intentionality to inject meaning into a putative meaningless conceptual image and then surreptitiously uses a judicious use of language to imply that the meaning is generated within the conceptual image itself. The notion of a ‗strange loop‘, for instance, primes the reader to expect something other-worldly to occur, and, of course, you need something ‗other-worldly‘ to happen in order to produce meaning from the meaningless. We are told that a strange loop is a loop that ‗allows‘ ‗selfperception‘ and the ability of symbols to talk to them-selves (!) (fig 11) and so on, but nowhere in a one and a half thousand page book is there an account of exactly how this happens. The reader supplies all the meaning his or her self! In his more recent book I am a Strange Loop Hofstadter uses lots of pretty colour pictures of hands trying to grasp computer generated images of self-referential mathematical whirlpools in order for his readers to get a better grasp of Hofstadter‘s loopy conception of what a ‗self‘, and what consciousness is. In Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid seems to suggest that even a book with enough internal self-referentiality would develop a rudimentary consciousness. Given the fact that Gödel, Escher, Bach itself must be the book to end all books for containing symbolic demonstrations of, allusions to, metaphors for, not to mention Escher pictures of, self-referentiality, it is truly amazing that all the volumes of this work do not get down of off bookshelves and begin composing further works of selfreferentiality. Hofstadter‘s, and to a lesser extent Penrose‘s, viewpoint is a type of subtle materialism and therefore acts as an inverting distorting mirror in that it requires that meaningless and perception-less acts of self-perception (!) create meaning and perception, but how? The evidence of the quantum ‗self-collapse‘ of the wavefunction within the fundamental field of Mind, however, clearly indicates that the function, or capacity, for self-perception is a ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 760 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics fundamental feature of the ground of reality and existence, and this vital spark of cognitive tendency, which Buddhist Dzogchen calls the ‗primordial pristine cognitiveness‘, is internal to the fundamental quantum field of reality. Within both Yogachara-Chittamatra (MindOnly) and Dzogchen (Great Perfection or Completion) Buddhist metaphysical perspectives the primordial ground is not only conceived of as a field of ‗empty‘ potentiality (which is to say ‗empty‘ of any particular manifestation), it is also asserted as have the fundamental and inseparable function of cognition. The ground of the universe is an infinite pool of potentiality and awareness, or empty-cognizance, which must create the infinite ‗illusions‘ within the dualistic experiential realm because of its fundamental nature of awareness has the impetus to explore its own nature through cognitive activity. Herbert V, Guenther, in his book on Dzogchen metaphysics The Matrix of Mystery explains this ‗pristine‘ cognitiveness of the fundamental ‗matrix‘: What this term refers to derives directly from the self-excitatoriness (rang-rig) of the field as the universe of and for experience, and as such denotes a sensitivity and alertness that makes cognition possible as such on every level of the biosphere. This pristine cognition has a self-referential intentionality of atemporal primordiality…47 Here we are reminded of the highly regarded physicist John Wheeler‘s vision of the universe as a ‗self-synthesized‘ universe: Directly opposite to the concept of universe as machine built on law is the vision of a world self-synthesized. On this view, the notes struck out on a piano by the observer participants of all times and all places, bits though they are in and by themselves, constitute the great wide world of space and time and things.48 This is the Dzogchen ‗self-excitatory universe‘, which comes into being through an infinite web of internal self-perceptions. The only way that the universe could ‗unfold‘ from within itself in this manner is if the fundamental quantum ground contained both the potentialities and the cognitive mechanism of perceptual ‗unfoldment‘ within its own nature: In Dzogchen thought there is the additional factor of intelligence which inheres in the very dynamics of the universe itself, and which makes primordiality of experience of paramount importance. The atemporal onset of this unfoldment occasions the emergence of various intentional structures…49 And, of course, within this process lies the origin of the extraordinary manifestation of the meaning structures of mathematics. As this entire process of unfoldment is driven by an internal fundamental cognitive self-perception it should come as no surprise that that Gödel‘s theorems, which apply self-referentiality to the internal logic of mathematics, have metaphysical implications! In the following few pages we are going to examine a formal operational method, which is to say a sequential imaginative procedure that has a distinct logical structure, which describes a sequence of steps by which the set of natural numbers - 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 … and so on, can be conceived of as ‗coming into being‘ through acts of cognition. It was proposed by the nineteenth century mathematician George Cantor (based on the ideas of Giuseppe Peano). The sequence of steps begins with the idea of the ‗empty set‘, which we can correlate with ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 761 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics the ‗empty‘ quantum field awaiting the first act of the creation operator, which in turn can be considered as a mathematical correlation of fundamental quantum cognition. A ‗set‘, which is an important mathematical idea, is a collection of objects, any objects; so the following is a set which contains an apple, an orange and a pear: Fruit set = { apple, orange, pear } A set, as shown, is contained in curly brackets ‗{ }‘ and the objects inside the brackets are called ‗members‘. So the following set: Set of first 5 natural numbers = { 0, 1, 2 , 3, 4 } has five members, all of which are natural numbers. This set therefore is said to be a subset of the complete set of natural numbers, which we will denote by N. The set of natural numbers is: N = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, … } This set is infinite, so it continues forever without end. Sets can contain other sets so the following set contains the set of natural numbers N and the set of the first 5 natural numbers: Set containing 2 sets = { N, {0, 1, 2, 3, 4} } Notice that the curly brackets which contain the set of the first 5 natural numbers are inside the curly brackets which contain the two contained members (the set of natural numbers and the set of the first 5 natural numbers). The empty set contains no elements and is denoted by  so: = { } The following is a set that contains the empty set, which is not the same as the empty set: Set containing empty set = {  } The following is a set that contains the empty set and the set of natural numbers: Set containing empty set and set of natural numbers = {  , N } This is the set theory notation required in order to understand the following discussion. We take the existence of the empty set as the starting point for our generation of the sequence of natural numbers; and we associate the empty set  with the first natural number 0. From this ‗empty‘ beginning we can posit, which means to ‗put or fix in place‘ or ‗to postulate‘ or even ‗cognize‘, the first set which actually contains something; and the ‗thing‘ that this first containing set contains is the empty set! So the first containing set is associated with the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 762 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics natural number 1; we shall express this by saying that the set is denoted by 1. We have, therefore, as our first two sets with their associated numbers: 0=={} 1 = {} Remember that  is not the same as {}; the set  has no members whereas the set {} has one member. The natural numbers associated with each set, therefore, are the number of members contained in the generated sets. The next set which gets generated, so to speak, contains the two set that have previously been generated: 2 = {, {}} And this is how the cascading process of the generation of the natural numbers continues. 3 = {, {}, {, {}}} 4 = {, {}, {, {}}, {, {}, {, {}}}} 5 = {, {}, {, {}}, {, {}, {, {}}}, {, {}, {, {}}, {, {}, {, {}}}}} As soon as the next set, and therefore the next natural number, is generated by the generation process, an immediately succeeding ‗gathering‘ process takes over. This gathering process takes all the sets that have previously been ‗generated‘ and then puts them into a new set. Once the new set has been gathered into a unity within the new set it is then posited, and thereby ‗generated‘, as a new existent set entity. This creates a new existent entity which, in its turn, must be ‗gathered‘ into the next set unity which is then posited. This continuous process of conceptual ‗gathering‘ and ‗positing‘ creates, in a conceptual lightening flash, the infinite field of natural numbers (fig 12). At the moment this number generating lightening flash of cognitive-conceptual gathering and positing is purely formal; it is a conceptual creation of the logical structure of the kind of process which would have to take place in order for the natural numbers to be ‗generated‘ from the starting point of the empty set, which in experiential terms we can think of, of course, as the mere awareness of emptiness, or the mere awareness of potentiality without content. Penrose says of this generative process of the existence of the natural numbers: …things like the natural numbers can be conjured literally out of nothing … this ‗existence‘ can seemingly be conjured up by, and certainly accessed by, the mere exercise of our mental imaginations without any reference to the details of the nature of the physical universe.50 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 763 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics Fig 12 – Conceptual lightening flash of gathering and positing generating the natural numbers. It is certainly both intriguing and remarkable that given the basic ground of these two logical aspects, the mere awareness of emptiness and the process of a spontaneous interdependent mechanism of the ‗gathering and positing of the gathered‘, the entire infinite set of the natural numbers are spontaneously generated. At the moment it might seem that Penrose is correct to allocate this process to ‗the mere exercise of our mental imaginations‘, thereby not having much to do with ‗the details of the nature of the physical universe.‘ But, on the other hand, the analysis that we have carried out above has clearly indicated that the mental-physical dichotomy cannot be, and indeed is not, absolute, but emerges from a deeper interconnected field of Mindnature. Furthermore we have established that Mindnature has the features of an empty field of potentiality within which there is an internal function of cognition, which is exactly what is required to generate through cognitive acts the natural numbers. Mindnature rather than logic, then, can quite naturally conjure the natural numbers from out of emptiness! Probably the most significant, fundamental and mysterious features of mind and consciousness, or fundamental Mindnature, is exactly its capacity to be both unitary and yet encompass a vast multiplicity of diverse perceptions within the unity of its perceptual field. This is the gathering and positing function that produces multileveled conceptual systems of all kinds. Perception itself it a multileveled process, with lower-level percepts being gathered together into higher-level perceptions. The higher level perceptions, of course, are automatically ‗posited‘ as ‗existent‘ perceptions, for, if this were not the case, they would not be ‗perceptions‘. The very process of gathering and positing, therefore, actually lies at the heart of the process of perception and conception. And, furthermore, as the very nature of the ultimate ground of consciousness, which is Mindnature, has been found to be emptiness, which is no-thing but pure potential for experience, together with the inner function of cognition, we find that at the very ground of reality lies the potentially for the cascade of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 764 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics positing of one-ness, or I-ness, which creates the field of natural numbers! This takes place through internal acts of self-perception within the ‗empty‘ field of reality. Fig 13 The physicist John Wheeler used his ‗self-perceiving universe‘ image (fig 13) in order to illustrate his view that quantum theory necessarily indicated that the universe came into existence through multitudinous acts of self-perception, utilizing so to speak sentient beings as its cognitive agents. In my book Quantum Buddhism: Dancing in Emptiness – Reality Revealed at the Interface of Quantum Physics and Buddhist Philosophy I modified this image as shown in figure 14 to indicate how the fundamental ground of reality paradoxically explores its own essential nondual nature by producing a multitude of sentient beings, each with the illusion of their own personal I-ness. One might say that in the process of asserting its own existence the universe temporarily hides its essential unity; this occurs because the action of the internal cognitive impulse within the unified ground field necessarily disturbs the unity of the ground. Fig 14 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 765 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics And it is a similar process of the cognitive assertion of unity, I-ness or one-ness, operating together with the unifying, or ‗gathering‘ function of consciousness which generates awareness of natural numbers (fig 15). Fig 15 Fig 16 schematically shows the actual perceptual acts, movements of consciousness which simultaneously ‗gather together‘ previous acts into a unity and then ‗posit‘ the new unity as a new act, thereby naturally establishing successive natural numbers. Fig 16 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 766 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics The extraordinary Thai meditation master Ajahn Chah, in one of his extemporary dharma talks, inspirational and glittering with crystal insights that he was widely famous for, spoke of the necessity for the understanding processes of consciousness; to actually be able to watch, and then deconstruct them within direct focused mediation practice in order to become aware of the fact that they were autonomous, natural and therefore not-‗self‘: Whatever we experience, it all arises within this knowing. If this mind did not exist, the knowing would not exist either. All this is phenomena of the mind. … the mind is merely the mind. It‘s not a being, a person, a self, or yourself. Its neither us nor them. …The natural process is not oneself. It does not belong to us or to anyone else. It‘s not any thing.51 And: This mind is free, brilliantly radiant, and unentangled with any problems or issues… In the beginning what was there? There is truly nothing there. It doesn‘t arise with conditioned things, and it doesn‘t die with them.52 The basic field of the mere mind, which is just the vibrant, empty capacity for the fundamental act of knowing, provides the ground from which all the phenomena of the experiential dualistic world emerges. It is just this fundamental Mindnature, the ground of knowing, so to speak, that provides the basis of both the coordinated appearances of the apparently external material world and the apparently ‗internal‘ conceptual structures of mind by which the functioning of appearances are comprehended. The entire vast array of appearances, experiences, reflective conceptual systems, and so on arise from a primordial flickering, knowing movement of consciousness within Mindnature that disturbs its quintessential unity: Please clearly understand that when the mind is still it‘s in its natural, unadulterated state. As soon as the mind moves, it becomes conditioned. … The desire to move here and there arises from conditioning. If our awareness doesn‘t keep pace with these mental proliferations as they occur, the mind will chase after them and be conditioned by them. Whenever the mind moves, at that moment, it becomes a conventional reality.53 And the most fundamental impetus which underlies the movement of mind is the perception of inherent existence of selfhood which cause the imputation of an ‗I’ or a ‘1’ into the unconditioned field of consciousness. This fundamental grasping at existence, which, paradoxically, appears to be an inner tendency within consciousness itself, must create the field of natural numbers through a natural cascade of ‗inner‘ perception. The ground which Ajahn Chah refers to as ‗mere unconditioned mind‘ the physicist David Bohm described in the following terms: So we see that that the ground of intelligence must be in the undetermined and unknown flux, that is also the ground of all definable forms of matter. Intelligence ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 767 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics is thus not deducible or explainable on any basis of knowledge (e.g. physics or biology). Its origin is deeper and more inward than any knowable order that could describe it.54 This fundamental ground of intelligence, which as we have seen Bohm clearly identified with the realm of the wavefunction, constitutes the very source of all intelligence, meaning and experience, it therefore cannot be explained by anything other; it is the ground for all explanations. This metaphysical perspective suggests that the perception and comprehension of the field of all number, as well as the mathematical cohesive conceptual structures which can be comprehended within this fertile ground of pure non-sensory meaning, arise from a basic ground of empty luminosity, or pure potential cognition. In this way the extraordinary variety and multiplicity for inwardly experienced mathematical meanings can be understood as developing out of the basis of the tendency towards self-perception within a fundamental ground of pure indeterminate meaning. The way in which we can conceive of this process generating the field of integers, which encompass positive and negative natural numbers, by a resonant, co-ordinated, amplificatory, perceptual process cascading from a tiny movement within an empty seed of potentiality is shown in fig 17. The empty seed is sunya, the zero point, the cosmic seed of emptiness which is ‗swollen‘ with potentiality. One meaning of sunya, which is the Indian origin of the concept of zero, is ‗the swollen‘, in the sense of an egg of potentiality which is about to burst into manifestation. Fig 17 The coiled eye inside the egg represents the inner function of cognition which is part of the fundamental nature of the fundamental ground of consciousness. When the strength of the perceptual tendency reaches a certain level there is an inner pulse of perception within the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 768 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics non-dual, interconnected field of consciousness. This causes an interconnected disturbance within the field, positive on one side, negative on the other, these two balance each other. Although these processes can be presented as purely logical structures which were considered by mathematicians such as Cantor and Gödel, like Penrose, to be residents of some kind of pure mathematical realm, the process of both the appearance of the ‗physical‘ world and the apparent logical-mathematical realm of pure non-sensuous meaning which ‗appears‘ to be directly accessible to individual consciousnesses (of sufficient subtly and training) becomes completely comprehensible when seen as the result of a deep resonant perceptual operation within a field of awareness-consciousness. The structures of both the external apparently independent material world, and the internal mathematical realm of meaning, would develop at a fundamental level of consciousness much deeper than the individual. It would follow, therefore, that the inner mathematical realm of pure nonsensuous meaning structures would appear to be as independent of the individual mind as the appearance of the material sensuous world. Mathematics, therefore, would appear to the individual mathematicians involved to be derived from an independent ‗Platonic‘ realm of pure meaning. The analysis of the process by which the natural numbers, and the positive and negative integers: I = { … -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, 2, 3 … } are generated injects a discrete numerical structure onto a fundamentally continuous field, and this becomes apparent as the whole numbers prove not to be sufficient thus giving rise to the use of rational numbers which are constructed by forming ratios, or fractions, of the form: M/N Examples are, of course: ½ , ¾ , 7/8, 4/15 , 678/10254. All this was known to the Greek world, indeed the Pythagoreans made a religion of their appreciation of the power of number in the task of understanding the structure and process of reality. However, as we have seen, when the awful mathematical truth of the existence of irrational numbers was discovered the numerical religious faith of the Pythagoreans was sorely tested. The existence of the irrational numbers was the first ominous sign of the ultimate emptiness of mathematics, which was demonstrated by Gödel. We have already employed the philosopher Alain Badiou‘s metaphor of the ‗swarming‘ of numbers and it is now necessary to look into this dense numerical multitude in a little more detail. Consider the number line, as the imaginative geometric representation of all possible ‗real‘ numbers is called, between the natural numbers 0 and 1. We might note in passing that the term ‗real‘ in this context was employed in order to reassure the frayed nerves of mathematicians in the face of the irrational numbers; giving the wayward entities the accolade of inherent reality was probably thought to bring their irrationality within acceptable conceptual limits, so to speak. If we take any two rational numbers within this range, 1/3 and ½ for example, then it is always possible to construct another rational number between them by finding the mid point. This is most easily visualized by expressing the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 769 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics numbers in terms of a denominator which is twice their common denominator. In the case of the denominators 2 and 3 the common denominator is 6 (multiply the denominators together) so twice that gives 12: 1/3 = 4/12 1/2 = 6/12 The mid point between these two rational numbers can be easily seen to be 5/12 (fig 18). This process of taking the midpoint can be repeated endlessly, or infinitely, as shown. This means that, without even considering the irrational numbers, there must be infinite number of rational numbers within any segment of the number line. Fig 18 When we count in the irrational numbers the situation becomes even more infinitely infinite! And this characterization is precisely correct because the infinite size of the infinity of the irrational numbers is actually larger than the infinite size of the infinity of the rational numbers. Because of this fact it turns out that there are more real numbers, which are the rational and irrational numbers taken together, in the gap between zero and one than there are natural numbers altogether. The mathematicians Robert and Ellen Kaplan remark, concerning this, that: … we have just found a second and larger size of infinity (and the hairs on the back of the neck stand up at the hint of perhaps more). It is hard to think of a comparable shock to the life on the mind (unless it be the revelation that others think ‗I‘)55 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 770 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics This situation clearly indicates a hierarchy of infinities each nested inside the one higher; and also each one contained within the one which is deeper). As Kaplan and Kaplan write: The infinite disguised as the indefinite is our … begetter. But in this same guise it is how we imagine the world truly to be: made up ultimately not of separate objects, molecules, atoms, electrons or quanta, but, past the ever more granular, to be as partless as the ocean, where our little prisms of selves spray up and soon enough submerge.56 We find an apparently inherently existent structure of independent entities, the natural numbers, the integers and the real numbers, disappearing into deeper realms, through the irrational and transcendental numbers, and ultimately into the formless realm of potentiality, the empty realm of sunyata, the ‗swollen‘ zero potentiality which lies at the heart of reality. Robert and Ellen Kaplan identify this ground of meaning and experience with the Greek concept of the apeiron which means ‗without boundary‘. According to Anaximander who lived a hundred and fifty years before Socrates, ‗…the source is the apeiron – as if distinction rose out of indistinction.‘57 Despite the indications that the foundations of mathematics might not be as robustly ‗logically‘ solid as often hoped, the term ‗logical‘ being taken as implying the absolutely independent existence of ultimate logical entities and procedures, attempts had been made to demonstrate such a pristine, logical scaffolding for mathematics. The work of Kurt Gödel, however, negated the logical possibility of such aspirations. Gödel‘s theorem is accepted by the community of logicians, mathematicians and philosophers as being of the foremost importance within the foundations of logic and mathematics. The full extent its significance, however, is a matter of some controversy. Penrose stands at the head of those who believe that Gödel‘s theorem opens out insights into the nature of mind: It was in 1930 that the brilliant young mathematician Kurt Gödel startled a group of the world‘s leading mathematicians and logicians, at a meeting in Königsberg, with what was to become his famous theorem. It rapidly became accepted as being a fundamental contribution to the foundations of mathematics-probably the most fundamental ever to be found-but I shall be arguing that in establishing his theorem, he also initiated a major step forward in the philosophy of mind.58 As we shall see Penrose is correct in his evaluation; for Gödel‘s theorem is exactly what we would expect of a self-perceiving universe! The actual details of the proof are too complex to be presented here, and it is not necessary to have a full comprehension of them. The actual result and the deep philosophical implications can be adequately presented without a great deal of difficult logic. What Gödel did was to prove that there are true arithmetical propositions that are not provable; a remarkable and strange achievement which required the use of a mathematical strange loop, a self-referential paradox. A usual prologue to an explanation of Gödel‘s use self-referential paradox is the presentation of the liar‘s paradox: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 771 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics This very sentence is false. Fig 19 Considering the truth possibilities of this innocuous looking sentence sends the reader on an infinite loop of hovering between the extremes of truth and falsity; as indicated by fig 19. If we take the right hand path and assert that the sentence is true then the actual assertion of the sentence makes the sentence false, this forces us now down the left hand path wherein the sentence is false, this assertion of falsehood, together with the sentence‘s own assertion of its falsity, renders the sentence true, and so on. Fig 20 The view of mathematics that was fundamental to most mathematicians own understanding of the nature of their discipline prior to Gödel, is indicated by fig 20. At the bottom the basic fundamental axiomatic truths, which can be seen to be true by their own internal logical nature, so to speak, are fed into the flawless, pre-existing, although not fully discovered, mathematical truth generating machine. By using the mechanisms of the mathematical truth ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 772 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics generating machine new, more complicated and illuminating mathematical truths can be generated, or proved. On this view it is the basic task of mathematicians to discover all of the details of the mechanisms of the mathematical truth machine so that all of the truths which can be generated are generated. There are two extremely important features that this ‗formal system‘ of the axioms and the generating machine must contain: Completeness – the system generates all possible truths that are contained within the axioms. Consistency – the system must not contain any hidden contradictions. Any logical contradiction, or inconsistency, within the system renders it useless Anything can be proved on the basis of an inconsistent system. In order to demonstrate the complete logical inviolability of the mathematical edifice, therefore, it was necessary to show, beyond any possible doubt, both consistency and completeness. Gödel, showed the opposite (fig 21). Fig 21 GT is the Gödel truth, or statement, which is known to be true but cannot be generated, or proved, by the mathematical logical generating machine. The Gödel statement is: This very statement is not provable within this system. The crucial issue is that of how Gödel was able to derive a statement, within the formal logical system of arithmetic, that can be known to be true at the same time as it asserts its own unprovability? This seems like self-referentiality gone mad! If the statement is unprovable, by its own admission so to speak, how do we know that it is true? It is this ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 773 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics feature of the theorem wherein lies the spectacular logical genius of Kurt Gödel. The logical trick that Gödel used was a coding of the symbols which are used within logical proofs into numerical values. This was his famous, at least in mathematical circles, Gödel numbering system. The system used Gödel employed the fundamental fact that all numbers can be decomposed into prime factor. For instance the number 18900 can be expressed as the prime decomposition: 18900 = 22 x 33 x 52 x 71 (= 2x2 x 3x3x3 x 5x5 x 7 ) This means that any sequence of natural numbers, in this case 2, 3, 2, 1, can be translated into a unique number, in this case 18900). The following table shows a simple method of translating some logical symbols into numerical values: Logical sign Gödel Number Meaning _______________________________________________________________ z 1 variable (unknown number) = 2 equals ‗ 3 prime Using this coding table the logical snippet ‗z=z‘ can be coded as shown: z=z‘ - coded → 21 x 32 x 51 x 73 = 2 x 9 x 5 x 343 = 30870 In this way any string of logical symbols which make up a logical deduction can be coded as a, generally very large, unique number. The extraordinary system of transforming strings of logical symbols into numerical values that Gödel developed enabled him to test whether a logical proposition was provable or not by examining the nature of the number it translated into. And by using this incredible dual layer of meaning Gödel was able to rigorously construct a special Gödel statement and associated number that he could demonstrate, by its numerical value, to be unprovable. This number corresponded to a logical proposition that actually stated that it was a logical proposition that could not be proved! The subtle, and amazing, point in this procedure is that we know that the statement that the logical proposition is unprovable is true precisely because the value of the Gödel number of the logical proposition guarantees its validity within the formal system. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 774 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics So now Gödel, and therefore we, know that there is a true statement within the formal system of arithmetic which states that: This very statement is not provable within this system. Hence the derivation of the Gödel theorem is able to prove, by using a trick to seemingly go outside the formal system, that this ‗unprovable‘ statement is true! This establishes the fact that the logical system which underlies arithmetic is incomplete, which is to say there are truths within the system which cannot be proved. It should be noticed that the Gödel statement is peculiarly self-referentially potent in that if it could be proved it would thereby be disproved; its proof would at the same time its disproof! This means that if the system was able to prove this statement then the system would have demonstrated the truth and falsity of same statement, a situation which meant that the system was inconsistent. This further means that if the system is consistent then the Gödel statement must be true; this means that the consistency of the system depends upon the fact that there is at least one unprovable truth. This is Gödel’s First Incompleteness Theorem: Any consistent, which means capable of effectively determining truth and falsity, formal system that is complex enough to contain arithmetic, must contain unprovable truths, which means it is incomplete. And this has a further correlative formulation which is Gödel’s Second Incompleteness Theorem: Any consistent, which means capable of effectively determining truth and falsity, formal system that is complex enough to contain arithmetic, cannot prove its own consistency. And the upshot of these remarkable theorems, or perhaps meta-theorems is a better description, concerning the formal nature of mathematical systems is that it is impossible for a formal system to validate itself. A complete and universal comprehension of the validity of the system requires a kind of meta-perception, an intuitive perception outside of the formal system itself. And in particular this intuitive requirement is especially essential in the domain of the infinite: The mathematician‘s intuitions of infinity-in particular, the infinite structure of the natural numbers-can no more be reduced to finitely formal systems than they can be expunged from mathematics.59 According to the eighteenth century philosopher David Hume: The capacity of the mind is not infinite, consequently no idea of extension or duration consists of an infinite number of parts or inferior ideas, but of finite number, and these simple and indivisible…60 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 775 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics But Hume, of course, simply did not have all the evidence required to decide upon this issue. In particular he certainly had no experience of meditative states of direct insight into the nature of consciousness which suggest that there is an ultimate experiential non-dual ground of reality, which is designated in the following as the ‗basic space‘: Basic space and awareness are innately all-encompassing. Basic space is the absence of mental constructs, recognizing the complete emptiness of mind essence. Space and awareness are inherently indivisible.61 Furthermore this basic space, which is also designated as emptiness, or ‗empty cognizance‘: …is totally beyond any kind of pigeonholing anything in anyway whatsoever. It is to be utterly open, beyond categories, limitations, and the confines of assumptions and belief.62 This basic space, the fundamental ground of consciousness, meaning and perception, therefore, corresponds to the Greek concept of the apeiron, the boundless or formless potentiality from which the forms of the dualistic realm, including numbers, emerge. It seems quite clear, then, that Gödel‘ famous theorems point to the fact that there is a realm of direct knowing and understanding which transcends and underlies any particular forms of knowledge and understanding. In an interview Penrose elucidates this insight as follows: Basically the thrust of my argument is that the quality of ―understanding‖ is something outside the capabilities of a computer … The generality of Gödel‘s argument simply illustrates how powerful conscious reasoning (through understanding) can be. Just following rules (which is what computers do—-albeit extraordinarily well) is something very different from understanding. (This is something that educationalists know very well!) I argue that understanding (whatever it is) requires ―consciousness‖ (whatever ―that‖ is!). To take the argument further, I take the view that the quality of consciousness is something that is potentially out there in the physical world, and is not necessarily something unique to human beings. But I regard the Gödel argument as showing that conscious understanding is something that cannot be properly imitated by a computer. So I argue that if consciousness is part of physics—-describable by the ―true‖ laws of physics—-then the true laws of physics must be non-computable. It is known (using Gödel-Turing-type arguments) that there are many areas of mathematics which are actually non-computable, so I am claiming that the true laws of physics (not yet fully known to us) must also be non-computable. But the known laws of physics are (more-or-less) computable, so we must look outside the known laws. I argue, further, that the only plausible loophole in the laws that we know lies in the issue of quantum measurement, and that the ―measurement paradox‖ (basically ―Schrödinger‘s cat‖) points to where we need to make further progress in our understanding of the laws of physics in order to uncover what is actually non-computable in the true laws).63 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 776 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics In true Penrose style he goes straight to the heart of the matter, or rather to the heart of the lack of matter in his assertion that consciousness must be a central and ubiquitous aspect of reality and that the quality of understanding or knowing which is function of consciousness transcends and contains logical mechanism. However he still seems to cling to the hope that are inherently existent and finally discoverable ‗laws of physics‘ which will bring a final comprehensive, and presumably logical in some fashion, understanding of the process of reality. But isn‘t it the case that ‗the only plausible loophole in the laws that we know lies in the issue of quantum measurement, and that the ―measurement paradox‖‘ indicates, like Gödel‘s results, that all aspects of reality have their source in the fundamental ‗empty cognizance‘ of Mindnature which lies beyond the capture of all conceptual systems. As the Zen master Hung Po explains a core Buddhist perspective: This pure Mind, the source of everything, shines forever and on all with the brilliance of its own perfection. But the people of the world do not awake to it, regarding only that which sees, hears, feels and knows as mind. Blinded by their own sight, hearing, feeling and knowing, they do not perceive the spiritual brilliance of the source substance. If they would only eliminate all conceptual thought in a flash, that source substance would manifest itself like the sun ascending through the void and illuminating the whole universe without hindrance or bounds.64 1 Penrose - Road to Reality p9 Penrose - Road to Reality p12 3 fq(x) Wigner‘s Gift Horse - Feb 1 2008 4 The Taming of the Infinite p244 5 Infinity p34 6 Taming p23 7 Number: The language of science p103 8 Number p105 9 Vedral, Vlatko (2010) p200 10 A elucidation of the philosophical procedures with examples of the Madhyamaka will be published in a forthcoming issue of the journal in an article entitled Quantum Madhyamaka: The Illusion-like Nature of Reality. 11 Infinity p3 12 Infinity p61-62 13 Infinity p69 14 Infinity p3 15 Alain Badiou 16 Web Dictionary 17 Roads to Reality p54 18 Infinity p118 19 The Analyst – section 75. 20 BI p25 21 Brunnhölzl, Karl (2004) p228 22 Heart Sutra 23 BI p32 24 Victor Mansfield 25 Emperor‘s New Mind, shadows of Realty, The Road to Reality 26 Penrose - Road to Reality p22 27 Penrose - Road to Reality p19 28 Karmapa' Middle Way p207 2 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 777 Journal of Consciousness Research & Exploration | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 738-777 Smetham, G. P. Mindnature: Origin of Physicality & Mathematics 29 Penrose - Road to Reality p1029 Penrose - Road to Reality p1031 31 ibid 32 ibid 33 Penrose - Road to Reality p1032 34 ibid 35 Penrose, Roger (2005) p508 36 Stapp, Henry (2004) p223 37 This phenomenon will be covered in a forthcoming article ‗Quantum Dzogchen: Nature and its Place in Consciousness‘. 38 Stapp ??? 39 Stapp - Nondual Quantum Duality 40 fq(x) Wigner‘s Gift Horse - Feb 1 2008 41 Penrose - Road to Reality p21 42 See above quote from Roads 43 Tegmark in On Math, Matter and Mind 44 I am a Strange Loop p30 45 GEB xxi 46 ibid 47 Guenther, Herbert V. (1984). p 24 48 48 Barrow, John D., Davies, Paul C. W., Harper, Charles L. (eds) (2004) p577 – Wheeler, J A (1999) ‗Information, physics, quantum: the search for links.‘ In Feynman and Computation: Exploring the Limits of Computers, ed A. J. G. Hey, p309 (314). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. 49 Guenther, Herbert V. (1984). p 38 50 Penrose - Road to Reality p64-65 51 Food For the Heart p181 52 Food For the Heart p183 53 Food For the Heart p179 54 Wholeness and the Implicate Order p67 55 The Art of the Infinite p240 56 The Art of the Infinite p75 57 ibid 58 Shadows of the Mind p64 59 Incompleteness p186 60 A Treatise on Human Nature 61 Dzogchen Primer p28 62 ibid 63 Shaking Up Foundations Of Math: Roger Penrose On Kurt Gödel's Groundbreaking Work 64 Addiss, Stephen; Lombardo, Stanley; Roitman, Judith (2008) – Zen Sourcebook p39 30 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 350-351 Gordon, G. Nixon on Conscious and Non-conscious Experience 350 Commentary Nixon on Conscious and Non-conscious Experience Gordon Globus* ABSTRACT To my mind (pace Heidegger) the enormous focus on consciousness and experience in contemporary philosophy is a continuation of metaphysical mistakes made by the Socratic philosophers and carried forward to this day, requiring “deconstruction” (in its technical postmodern sense). My view is that Existenz is “between-two,” between two quantum thermofield theoretical modes in the ground (vacuum) state of quantum brain dynamics. In the belonging-together (matching) of dual thermofield modes, Existenz is unfolded as explicate world-thrownness. Discussion of conscious and nonconscious experience, even at Nixon’s perspicuous level, are unfortunately off the mark. Key Words: conscious, non-conscious, existenz, quantum brain dynamics. Greg Nixon (2010) has provided a thorough and thoughtful discussion of non-conscious experience, over against conscious experience. Curiously, the much used term “experience” forgets its etymology, which is from experio, to try out, as in experiment. And as Nixon points out, the etymology of con-sciousness refers to sociality, to know-together, far different from what we mean by consciousness today. Such dislocations of original meaning attract the deconstructive eye as evidence of textual tension. To my mind the plethora of articles on consciousness (which even has its own devoted journal, The Journal of Consciousness Studies), with no discernable progress but an ever more brilliant controvery to which Nixon contributes, suggests that, frankly speaking, the whole discussion is barking up the wrong tree. Some would even proclaim Ignoramus et ignorambus. We are ignorant and shall remain so! I would rather the whole kit and kaboodle of consciousness and experience be replaced by Heideggerian Existenz, a dynamic in which we always find ourselves already amidst a world of affordances. (Always finding ourselves thus is the meaning of being “thrown” … existence is thrown existence.) “Consciousness” and “experience” are then reserved for reflexive existence, quite the opposite of Nixon’s emphasis. “Intentionality” in the existential brain model becomes the brain’s attunement, which is a function of both the brain’s self-tuning activities and priming by sensory input. (For extensive discussions of existence, consciousness and intentional self-tuning see Globus (2009).) The tangle of thought to which the idea of non-conscious experience leads can be seen by considering only the first 5 of Nixon’s 21 indicators of non-conscious experience, given in his Appendix. He considers blindsight to be the premier scientific example of non-conscious experience. Blindsight patients, while consciously blind in some part of the visual field, may respond appropriately to stimuli in that part of the visual field. But this does not necessarily imply any nonconscious experience, only that the stimuli have primed the brain’s attunement which constrains to appropriate responses, irrespective of any conscious or non-conscious contentual experience. The conception of non-conscious experience is replaced by the brain’s attunement. Correspondence: Gordon Globus, M.D, Prof. Emeritus of Psychiatry & Philosophy, Univ. of California Irvine, CA, USA E-mail: ggglobus@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 350-351 Gordon, G. Nixon on Conscious and Non-conscious Experience 351 Anton’s syndrome is, I believe, commonly misunderstood in the way that Nixon does. It is widely thought the patient is blind—has no visual experience—and confabulates having visual experience. However, that the patient actually has visual experience (though usually dim) is shown by a patient discovering after a year, to her great dismay, that she is actually blind (Raney and Nielsen, 1942). Clearly she had visual experience the whole time, probably via some kind of coherent resonance into the visual system from other intact perceptual systems. The confabulations serve to explain the mistakes the patient makes while dimly having a visual experience autonomous of visual input (much as a hypnotic subject confabulates the reasons for actions actually controlled by post-hypnotic suggestion). Anton’s syndrome features a dim conscious visual experience, just as the patients claim, and has nothing to do with a non-conscious experience. Prosopanosognosia is the inability to recognize consciously faces even though there are bodily evidences that the face has in fact been recognized. Nixon comments that “obviously recognition is being non-consciously experienced,” but there is no requirement that any kind of experience is involved. The same mechanism as in blindsight comes into play: sensory input primes the intentional attunement which signals the body in preparation for a conscious experience that never comes. To be ready to recognize someone does not imply that recognition will be experienced, if there is some fault in the mechanism. Priming of intentional attunement also explains Nixon’s cases of physiological and emotional responses to people who are not recognized and actions that are not owned. Nixon considers split-brain experiments as providing evidence for non-conscious experience. He states, “Again, physiological and emotional response readings indicate that subjects are experiencing, but are not conscious of it.” But split-brain studies only show that the right brain cannot talk about its conscious experiences. Gazzaniga and Miller (2009) indeed state that “while the right hemisphere’s visual representations are much sharper and its perceptions of space are much keener than the left hemisphere’s, the right hemisphere is probably mute, autistic-like, and mentally impaired” (268). A non-reportable experience is not the same as a non-conscious experience (unless consciousness is equated with reportability, which Nixon does not appear to intend). To my mind (pace Heidegger) the enormous focus on consciousness and experience in contemporary philosophy is a continuation of metaphysical mistakes made by the Socratic philosophers and carried forward to this day, requiring “deconstruction” (in its technical postmodern sense). My view is that Existenz is “between-two,” between two quantum thermofield theoretical modes in the ground (vacuum) state of quantum brain dynamics (Globus 2009). In the belonging-together (matching) of dual thermofield modes, Existenz is unfolded as explicate world-thrownness. Discussion of conscious and non-conscious experience, even at Nixon’s perspicuous level, are unfortunately off the mark. References Gazziniga MS, Miller MB. (2009) The left hemisphere does not miss the right hemisphere. In: The neurology of consciousness. S. Laureys, G, Tononi, Eds. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Globus, G. (2009) The transparent becoming of world. A crossing between process philosophy and quantum neurophilosophy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. McGinn, C. (1991) The problem of consciousness. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Nixon,G. (2010) From panexperientialism to individual self consciousness: The continuum of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 216-233 Raney AA, Nielsen JM. (1942) Denial of blindness (Anton’s symptoms). Feuilleton of the Los Angeles Neurological Society. 7: 150-1. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

864 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part I) Article Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe Graham P. Smetham* Abstract In this work we present a notion of God as the infinitely creative source and sustainer of the universe (“Quantum Mind”), a creative dimension of Being that, seemingly with purpose, fragments an infinite primordial awareness into a vast multitude of experiencing sentient beings. In fact the metaphysical model of the creation and functioning of the universe presented in this work has truly awe-inspiring and deeply significant implications for our understanding of and our engagement with the process of reality. In particular it must be pointed out that in actuality the account presented rules out a particular picture of God, the picture generally associated with naïve and fundamentalist views of theistic religion. However there are much less naïve and more philosophically coherent images of the notion of God which are associated with the mystical dimensions of theistic religions. The Theory of Everything outlined by Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow in their book The Grand Design: New Answers to the Ultimate Questions of Life is remarkable in a way that probably goes beyond the comprehension of the authors. Far from being a mere possible addition to the Hawking-Mlodinow metaphysical model, we shall see in the course of this paper that such a „mystical‟ vision of the creative source of the process of the universe is required in order for the proposed TOE to get off the ground. Keywords: creative source, sustainer, GOD, quantum mind, matrix, universe, Buddhism, theory of everything. Our first point of leverage is the fact that according to the Hawking-Mlodinow Theory of Everything (hence forth abbreviated to HAM-TOE): Bodies such as stars or black holes cannot just appear out of nothing. But a whole universe can. (p180) The reasoning offered for this rests on the following observations: 1) the energy of the entire universe must remain constant with a total energy of zero and 2) the creation of matter requires expenditure of energy so matter has positive energy whilst gravitational energy is negative. From this basis the HAM-TOE asserts that: On the scale of the entire universe, the positive energy of matter can be balanced by the negative gravitational energy, and so there is no restriction on the creation of whole universes. Because there is a law like gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing as described in Chapter 6. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we * Correspondence: Graham Smetham, http://www.quantumbuddhism.com E-mail:graham@quantumbuddhsim.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 865 exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going. [p180] The glaring issue contained within this assertion is what may be called the inappropriate Deification of the Power of Mathematics, for it is indeed the case that Hawking & Mlodinow have replaced God by making the assumption that if something is mathematically possible on paper then it must be the case that it actually happens. In other words the HAM-TOE requires the assumption that mathematics has within its own nature the power to „breath fire‟ into its own equations. But one must ask what actually guarantees that just because „the positive energy of matter can be balanced by the negative gravitational energy‟ it must follow that the universe „will create itself from nothing.‟ The glorification of the power of mathematics is endemic within physics. Roger Penrose for instance writes in his tour de force The Road to Reality that: …mathematics is a kind of necessity, virtually conjuring its very self into existence through logic alone.1 In which case it is also a necessity to ask „what breaths fire into the logic‟2 such that it is enabled to perform such a remarkable feat? Max Tegmark takes this glorification of the efficaciousness of mathematics to the ultimate extreme with his claim that ultimate reality is mathematics. This proposal leads to the highly counter-intuitive notion that when you eat your breakfast then all you are doing is eating a bunch of mathematical equations, or one bunch of mathematical equations is eating and digesting (or performing mathematical „automorphisms‟ upon) another bunch of mathematical equations. There is, perhaps, a very weak sense in which this may be true, but the notion that this is the entire truth of the matter surely automorphs counter-intuition into absurdity, an absurdity that Penrose wisely retreats from: My own position on the matter is that we should certainly take Plato‟s world as providing a kind of „reality‟ to mathematical notions …, but I might baulk at actually attempting to actually identify physical reality with the abstract reality of Plato‟s world.3 For, as Penrose is clearly aware, one of the central and crucial issues which must be resolved in any TOE is that of the nature of the „physical‟ substance of reality. In pre-quantum, or classical, physics the notion of the „physical‟ was clearly identified with materiality, but in the quantum era this simplistic, and for some cozy, identification is no longer possible. For, as physicist Henry Stapp has pointed out, classical type matter does not exist: One might try to interpret the „matter‟ occurring in this formula as the „matter‟ that occurs in classical physics. But this kind of „matter‟ does not exist in nature.4 This ontological conclusion has been „forced,‟ to employ the term use by John Wheeler, upon the community of physicists by the experimental evidence which clearly suggests that consciousness is in some way entangled at the quantum level so that the material world, which was once assumed to be completely independent of observing minds, cannot be so. Thus the physicist Anton Zeilinger, who with his team has carried out some of the most precise and subtle quantum experiments currently possible, has referred to the „obviously wrong notion of a reality independent of us‟.5 This is a situation which Penrose for one is not happy with: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 866 Quantum theory was not wished upon us by theorists. It was (for the most part) with great reluctance that they found themselves driven to this strange and, in many ways, philosophically unsatisfying view of the world.6 The metaphysical situation has indeed become murky. In the era of post Cartesian classical philosophy the candidates for the ultimate substance of reality were limited to Mind and Matter. But now that Matter has failed in its allotted task it seems that many minds are suspicious of Mind and would prefer anything with a whiff of plausibility, however slight, in its place; hence the co-opting of mathematics into the arena of candidature for ultimate status. However as we shall see this assumption of the innate motive power of mathematics is not only desperately implausible, it is also unnecessary when all the evidence is taken into account. As indicated above the magical mathematical manifestation of the universe is supposed to take place through the operation of the mathematical creative machinery acting upon „Nothing.‟ Here again the HAM-TOE presses credulity towards a nonmathematical limit. For as the term „nothing‟ is generally understood one would have to say that nothing can come from Nothing, even if we do put a capital „N‟ in front of the word. This is because in the West „nothing,‟ or „nothingness,‟ generally indicates not only the complete lack of any entity but also the lack of potentiality for the manifestation of entity or entities. However, it is illuminating in this context to trace one of the forerunners of the mathematical notion of „zero,‟ which derives from India. The Sanskrit term sunya, is the zero point, the cosmic seed of emptiness which is „swollen‟ with potentiality, an egg of potentiality which is about to burst into manifestation. Thus for Buddhist philosophy the ground of the manifested universe is not „Nothingness‟ but shunyata or emptiness, which is not a blank void of pure nothingness but, rather, an infinite ground of potentiality from which all things may arise but which in itself is no-thing, precisely because it provides the possibility for the manifestation of any particular „thing.‟ The HAM-TOE version of nothingness as it stands would surely not allow anything of „substance,‟ be it mind or matter, to emerge from its pristine lack of entity or potentiality so it is necessary to assert that the use of the term „nothing‟ in the HAM-TOE can only make sense if it is akin to the Buddhist notion of emptiness: a nondual, which is to say undivided and unitary, ground of potentiality for manifestation which is „swollen‟ with the possibility for „spontaneous creation‟ of „entire universes.‟ According to Hawking and Mlodinow „we do know that the origin of the universe was a quantum event,‟7 so it must follow that the nature of the field of potentiality which must exist prior to the „spontaneous creation‟ must be a quantum field. This view is supported by the fact that the quantum field is clearly identified as being exactly a field of potentiality from out of which the „classical‟ world somehow emerges. Henry Stapp for instance describes the functioning of the quantum realm as follows: …this evolving quantum state would represent the „potentialities‟ and „probabilities for actual events. … the „primal stuff‟ represented by the evolving quantum state would be idealike rather than matterlike, apart from its conformity to mathematical rules.8 This fragment, which describes the development of a quantum field within the realm of manifestation, shows us exactly that the quantum realm is a realm of potentiality which functions according to „mathematical rules‟. However, whereas in the HAM-TOE the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 867 substantial nature of the „primal stuff‟ upon which the mathematical rules operate is left in limbo, Stapp‟s depiction indicates that it must be idealike; a suggestion that, as we shall see, is implicitly supported by the HAM-TOE. This view is supported by the views of a significant number of physicists. To give just one example, in his recent book Decoding Reality Vlatko Vedral asserts that: The Universe starts empty but potentially with a huge amount of information. The first key event is the first act of symmetry breaking…9 If we ask to which Cartesian realm the category of „information‟ belongs, we can hardly place it anywhere else than the category of the idealike stuff of Mind. It is also intriguing to find that according to Vedral: Quantum physics is indeed very much in agreement with Buddhistic emptiness.10 So Vedral identifies the field of information, which he considers to be the nature of the quantum ground, with the Buddhist concept of emptiness, the field of potentiality which underlies the manifestation of all phenomena. The crucial issue is the nature of „the first act of symmetry breaking,‟ that acts upon the „empty‟ informational ground of potentiality. According to the Buddhist Tantric instruction book The Ornament of Stainless Light: When a world undergoes destruction, there follows a time of emptiness.…During this time of emptiness the subtle particles … exist as isolated fragments and are not in any conventional sense objects of the sensory powers of the eye and so forth. They are known as empty particles and remain isolated in empty space. When the potential of the collective karma is ripened, the subtle air particles come together to form air whose nature is light and moving.11 It is worth noting here that the Buddhist metaphysical vision of the process of the universe has always been cyclic in nature. As each universe is destroyed at the end of a phase of manifestation, lasting vast time scales, it leaves „seeds‟ of potentiality for the structuring of the next universe; this perspective clearly resonates with Penrose‟s latest proposals regarding the cyclic nature of the universal process contained in his recent book Cycles of Time. The Buddhist term „karma‟ is to a large extent misunderstood in the West as it is generally thought to be a purely moral concept. This is incorrect. The term „karma‟ simply means an action which leaves an informational imprint in a deep level of reality which can be activated at some future point in time. This extends to all actions of sentient beings, including perceptions; any perception, of the material world for instance, will strengthen the potentiality for the same perception to be made at a future point in time. Thus according to this perspective all perceptions of the material world strengthen the potentiality for the material world to manifest at future points in time. This Buddhist perspective, contained within the Yogacara, consciousness-only, metaphysical view established around the 4th century C.E. is remarkably prescient of some aspects of quantum theory. According to the great twentieth century physicist John Wheeler for instance: Directly opposite to the concept of universe as machine built on law is the vision of a world self-synthesized. On this view, the notes struck out on a piano by the observer participants of all times and all places, bits though they are in and by themselves, constitute the great wide world of space and time and things.12 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 868 Here we find Wheeler, drawing his conclusion from his knowledge and understanding of quantum theory, asserting that it is the „notes struck out‟ by „observer participants,‟ which can only mean the actions and perceptions of sentient beings, that „constitute the great wide world of space and time and things;‟ a view which exactly parallels the Buddhist Yogacara perspective: The entire world was created through latent karmic imprints. When these imprints developed and increased, they formed the earth, the stones, and the seas. Everything was created through the development or propagation of these latent karmic potentials.13 According to the Yogacara understanding of the process of reality such „latent karmic imprints‟ are produced exactly by the multitudinous perceptual activities of the „observer participants of all times and all places.‟ This view has a significant application within the HAM-TOE because it gives us an indication of the kind of mechanism which might operate within the informational ground of potentiality in order to trigger the creative act which constitutes the „first act of symmetry breaking‟ which splits, so to speak, the unitary ground of potentiality. The HAM-TOE uses as its central insight for its development the Feynman „sum over histories‟ approach to elucidating the quantum phenomenon exhibited by the famous double slit experiment. In this quantum explanation the particles which take part in the experiments must be considered to potentially take all possible routes between their experimental starting and end points: In the double slit experiment Feynman‟s ideas mean the particles take paths that go through one slit or the other; paths that thread through the first slit, back out through the second slit, and then go through the first again; paths that visit the restaurant that serves that great curried shrimp, and then circle Jupiter a few times before heading home; even paths which go across the universe and back. This, in Feynman‟s view, explains how the particle acquires the information about which slits are open… [p76] Thus by trying out every possible path the „particle‟ can „acquire‟ „information‟ about the entire configuration of the universe! Of course one would have to say that a „particle‟ that can perform such an amazing feat can hardly be considered to be a normal „classical‟ type particle. In fact whilst in this explorative state it is quite clearly a quantum field of potentiality „feeling‟ out the possible paths. Remarkably there is significant evidence now, which is causing excitement in the field of quantum biology, that this is also the mechanism which underlies the phenomenon of photosynthesis, a process fundamental for the existence of life. Graham Fleming, a physical chemist holding joint appointments with Berkeley Lab and UC Berkeley, suggested that quantum mechanical effects might be the key to the ability of green plants, through photosynthesis, to almost instantaneously transfer solar energy from molecules in light harvesting complexes to molecules in electrochemical reaction centers. Recently a new collaborative team identified entanglement as a natural feature of these quantum effects: Fleming and his group discovered the existence of “quantum beating” signals, coherent electronic oscillations in both donor and acceptor molecules. These ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 869 oscillations are generated by the excitation energy from captured solar photons, like the waves formed when stones are tossed into a pond. The wavelike quality of the oscillations enables them to simultaneously sample all the potential energy transfer pathways in the photosynthetic system and choose the most efficient.14 Previously it was known that the mechanism of photosynthesis involved the transfer of electrons, but the puzzle was how the transfer was achieved with such great efficiency. It now appears that electrons quantumly test out all possible paths and „choose‟ the most efficient. In this context of course it must not be thought that such a choice indicates some sort of conscious decision but, rather, there is a mechanism through which the process of photosynthesis quantum-mechanistically „explores‟ the possibilities and then, again quantummechanistically, „selects‟ the most efficient. This, however, does leave the question of what exactly is the nature of the quantum mechanistic processes awaiting an answer. In the formulism of Feynman‟s sum over histories approach each exploratory path has an associated „phase‟ which is the component of an overall „probability amplitude‟ which can be calculated for any particular path. Thus if we wish to find the probability amplitude for a „particle‟ going through slit A and landing at point B then we must add the phases for all the possible paths which starts at A and finish at B. Some phases enhance each other whilst others cancel each other and because of this the overall result which emerges, according to the HAM-TOE presentation is, we are told, no surprise: Feynman‟s theory gives an especially clear picture of how a Newtonian world picture can arise from quantum physics, which seems very different. … when you add the contribution from paths that are close to each other the phases normally vary wildly, and so … they tend to add to zero. But the theory also shows there are certain paths for which the phases have a tendency to line up, and so those paths are favoured; that is they make a larger contribution to the behaviour of the particle. [p79] At this point in the presentation of the HAM-TOE it appears that the connection between the quantum level and the emergence of the „classical‟ everyday world is quite unparadoxical, a view which is contrary to most physicists‟ assessment. In a recent work Quantum Reality: Theory and Practice (2009), for instance, Jonathan Allday writes: The problem is that the small scale laws describe a way of behaving that, judged by the standards of everyday experience, is utterly bizarre. It is very difficult to see how all the business going on at the atomic scale can lead to the regular, reliable world we spend our lives in.15 And physicist and science media personality Jim Al-Khalili has stated that: For me the biggest mystery of all lies at the heart of reality: how to explain the weird behaviour of the subatomic world. We have a very powerful theory that explains the atomic world-quantum mechanics. But the problem is no one understands what it means.16 One can only assume that at the time he made this statement (2009) Jim Al-Khalili had not conversed with Hawking and Mlodinow on the matter, or perhaps it is only this year that Hawking and Mlodinow have decided that they have cracked the problem, which is doubtful as books generally take a while to prepare. For the moment, however, we must not be too ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 870 hasty in accepting their confidence; in particular it is noticeable that the issue of the origin of the „favoured‟ paths referred to, those paths which obligingly carve out the Newtonian „classical‟ world we are all familiar with, is not addressed in the HAM-TOE picture so far (did God put them there?!). We are now approaching the dramatic and truly mind-expanding central core of the HAMTOE, but there is just one further quantum component required. This is the much discussed but still controversial phenomenon of the quantum observer effect, which is the fact that observation of quantum state or system will transform the state or system into an experienced classical event. The source of the controversy is the fact that the phenomenon of this state change, the famous „collapse of the wavefunction,‟ seems to clearly suggest that consciousness is an essential ingredient in the process. As Roger Penrose, someone who actually hates the idea, was forced to admit in his book Shadows of the Mind: …at the large end of things, the place where „the buck stops‟ is provided by our conscious perceptions. …17 The exact mechanism which might possibly underlie this phenomenon is by no means agreed. However a recent proposal by Wojciech Zurek and his associates is that it is the very nature of the quantum „dream stuff‟ of reality to be „epiontic,‟ which means that perception creates ontology. This suggestion is clearly in line with Wheeler‟s self-synthesizing universe paradigm and also the Buddhist Yogacara assertion that all perceptions leave traces which make future similar perceptions more probable (thus the Yogacara proposal indicates the origin of the potentialities within the quantum realm, or the quantum wavefunction). Hawking and Mlodinow skirt around the issue of the implied entanglement of consciousness at the quantum level. They describe the fact that when „which way‟ information is collected, which tells the experimenters which path any particle has traveled, the interference pattern disappears, a result which shows that conscious intervention has a direct effect on the experimental outcome. They present their conclusion is as follows: Quantum physics tells us that no matter how thorough our observation of the present, the (unobserved) past, like the future, is indefinite and exists only as a spectrum of possibilities. The universe, according to quantum physics, has no single past, or history. The fact that the past takes no definite form means that observations you make on a system in the present affect its past. [p82] And they press the point home with a description of the Wheeler cosmic delayed choice experiment and conclude: …the universe doesn‟t have just s single history, but every possible history, each with its own probability; and our observations of its current state affect its past and determine the different histories of the universe, just as the observations of the particles in the double-slit experiment affect the particles‟ past. [p83] And so we come to the astonishing proposal. From the timeless point of creation a spontaneous universal creative act projects all possible futures into a universal possibility or potentiality space. At the point of creation everything that possibly can happen becomes potential, so at the point of creation all possible future histories of the universe come into being as potentialities, although not yet experienced realities. Admittedly Hawking and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 871 Mlodinow are not very precise about their proposal and it is necessary to tease it out of their elucidations: In this view, the universe appeared spontaneously, starting off in every possible way. Most of these correspond to other universes …. Some people make a great mystery of this idea, sometimes called the multiverse concept, but these are just different expressions of the Feynman sum over histories. [p136] Clearly the HAM-TOE corresponds to the multiverse scenario, the spontaneous creative burst creating the multiverse of possible worlds. But a hugely significant feature of the HAM-TOE presentation is the fact that the „observers are part of the system‟ [p135] and whereas in the usual multiverse scenario, the many-worlds theory, helpless observers are haplessly and unknowingly rent asunder to occupy an exponentially increasing vast number of new „parallel worlds,‟ in the HAM-TOE observers have serious work to do: The histories that contribute to the Feynman sum don‟t have an independent existence, but depend on what is being measured. We create history by our observations, rather than history creating us. [p140] In other words the observers, or what Wheeler called „observer-participants,‟ are able to weed out possible universes, and thereby select those which remain in the possibility mix, even backwards in time. Thus one of the central chapters in the The Grand Design is entitled „Choosing Our Universe‟: The idea that the universe does not have a unique observer-independent history might seem to conflict with certain facts that we know. There might be one history in which the moon is made of Roquefort cheese. But we have observed that the moon is not made of cheese, which is bad news for mice. Hence histories in which the moon is not made of cheese do not contribute to the current state of our universe, though they might contribute to others. This might sound like science fiction but it isn‟t. [p140] It is unfortunate that the authors decided to use such a flamboyant presentation because it is very easy to read the book and miss the dramatic implications precisely because of the cheesy popularising slant. However, it is quite clear that we are being told that the reason why the moon is not made of Roquefort cheese is because the observer participants of this particular universe have observed that the moon is not made of cheese. The observations made by the observer-participants have filtered out, backwards in time, the possibility of a cheese moon and also, at the same time, have determined the possibilities that are projected into the future. And, as Hawking and Mlodinow say, this is not science fiction (although I seriously doubt whether there really was ever, in any universe, the possibility of the moon being made of cheese; might it be possible to push the metaphors of popular science towards the realms of impossibility?). However, we may as well stick with the examples used by Hawking and Mlodinow for the purposes of elucidation. Figure 1 provides a much simplified graphic presentation of the physical-metaphysical (the boundaries between the two are blurred in this context) picture of the evolution of the universe. This picture presents the situation as if it occurs at one moment in time but in „reality‟ the process operates over long time scales once there are sentient beings, or observer-participants, extant within the universe to take part in the process of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 872 universal selection and solidification. Once there is a community of sentient organisms inhabiting the universe then their perceptions, which have influence at the quantum level, affect the probabilities which have been projected at the moment of the Big Bang. If we accept the cosmic story presented by Hawking and Mlodinow then at the point of creation all possible „alternative histories‟ are projected into a kind of cosmic possibility space, but none of these possibilities are „actualized‟ as yet. For actualization to take place requires the presence of sentient beings to perceive and experience. Figure 1 In this model we can visualize all the observer-participants moving through the vast cosmic pool of potentialities and as they do so their perceptions alter the probabilities of potentialities both backwards and forwards in time. For instance, at the moment of creation there is a possibility (according to H and M) that the moon might end up of being made of Roquefort cheese and also a possibility that it may end up comprised of Moon-rock, as it is in our current universe. When sentient beings get on the job of filtering through the probabilities through their perceptive activities, they somehow „choose‟ to have a Moon-rock Moon rather than a Roquefort cheese Moon. Thus the possibility of a Roquefort cheese Moon is filtered out of the cosmic mix of potentialities whilst the possibility of a Moon-rock Moon is solidified into actuality. John Wheeler described this vision of the process as follows: Law without law. It is difficult to see what else than that can be the plan of physics. It is preposterous to think of the laws of physics as installed by a Swiss watchmaker ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 873 to endure from everlasting to everlasting when we know that the universe began with a big bang. The laws must have come into being. Therefore they could not have been always a hundred percent accurate. That means that they are derivative, not primary … Events beyond law. Events so numerous and so uncoordinated that, flaunting their freedom from formula, they yet formulate firm form … The universe is a self excited circuit. As it expands, cools and develops, it gives rise to observerparticipancy. Observer-participancy in turn gives what we call tangible reality to the universe … Of all the strange features of the universe, none are stranger than these: time is transcended, laws are mutable, and observer participancy matters.18 And this vision is also contained within the work of several other significant physicists, both current and recent (full details can be found in my recently published book Quantum Buddhism: Dancing in Emptiness – Reality Revealed at the Interface of Quantum Theory and Buddhist Philosophy). One example is the work of David Bohm which is being carried forward by Paavo Pylkkänen and Basil Hiley. Bohm calls the cosmic possibility soup the „implicate order‟ and the actualized experienced world the „explicate order: Bohm calls the implicate order the primary reality, this reality exists „folded up‟ in nature and gradually unfolds as the universe evolves, enabling organization to emerge, in this way, the implicate becomes explicate over time.19 In his important book Wholeness and the Implicate Order Bohm gives an overview of his perspective as follows: Our overall approach has thus brought together questions of the nature of the cosmos, of matter in general, of life, and of consciousness. All of these have been considered to be projections of a common ground. This we may call the ground of all that is, at least in so far as this may be sensed and known by us, in our present phase of unfoldment of consciousness. Although we may have no detailed perception or knowledge of this ground it is still in a certain sense enfolded in our consciousness…20 This version endorses the view that there is a common fundamental nondual ground which gives rise to the entire process of the dualistic realm and it also emphasizes the necessary cognitive function of consciousness as fundamental. Thus it becomes clear that sentient beings are the „agents‟ through which the universe acquires both meaning and structure. And Henry Stapp adds weight to this anthropic viewpoint with what he calls „the two-way quantum psycho-physical bridge‟: …the connection between physical behaviour and human knowledge was changed from a one way bridge to a mathematically specified two-way interaction that involves selections made by conscious minds.21 Which requires the recognition that: …the quantum universe tends to create meaning: the quantum law of evolution continuously creates a vast ensemble of forms that can act as carriers of meaning; it generates a profusion of forms that have the capacity to sustain and refine themselves.22 All of which surely indicates that the role of consciousness is a primary ingredient within the process of the universe. Without sentient beings making „selections‟ there would be no mechanism through which the potentialities flashed out at the point of universal manifestation ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 874 could ever become actualized. But this does not mean that such selections are fully conscious, it is not being suggested that there was a universal gathering of proto-consciousnesses at some primordial time to decide whether to go for a cheese Moon or Moon-rock Moon; the process operates at a level of awareness much deeper than fully individualized awareness. To suggest anything otherwise would be ridiculous. Nevertheless the necessity for the operation of a selective filtering mechanism operating through the agency of all sentient organisms that have ever been contained within the universe is clearly required by the HAM-TOE. Thus consciousness, not mathematics, must be the primary mover of the universal process, the force that breaths fire into the mathematical equations, perhaps even the creative ground of the universe that produces the equations themselves, as Wheeler intimated. However, despite the fact that the HAM-TOE clearly requires consciousness to be an internal feature of the process of the evolution of the universe and the sentient beings within it, Hawking and Mlodinow are reluctant to commit to this conclusion. In fact, as we shall see, in their final chapter they seem to contradict the major insights of their own work. This is all the more remarkable as in their penultimate chapter they tell us that their HAM-TOE argues for the Strong Anthropic Principle (SAP). Before their discussion of the SAP they briefly discuss the WAP (Weak Anthropic Principle). This, they say, is not controversial; the very fact that sentient beings exist in this universe clearly means that this universe must be fine tuned for sentient life. If this were not the case then obviously sentient life would not inhabit this particular universe. But, according to the HAM-TOE, there are many „cosmic habitats‟ that exist in the universe (H and M sometimes seem to confuse the concepts „universe‟ and „multiverse‟ – i.e. our universe is one of the „cosmic habitats‟ in the overall universe, which other writers would refer to as the multiverse). The HAM-TOE, however, goes for the Strong version which: …suggests that the fact that we exist imposes constraints not just on our environment but on the possible form and contents of the laws of nature themselves. The idea arose because it is not only the peculiar characteristics of our solar system that seem oddly conducive to the development of human life but also the entire characteristics of the entire universe, and that is much more difficult to explain. [p155] Now this is a very odd formulation of the reason for the Strong Anthropic Principle. This is because if one gives it a few moments thought it is easy to see that it would be in fact very odd indeed if the entire universe, except for the tiny part which comprises our solar system, were to be such that it ruled out the possibility of life. This would mean that just our tiny, in fact incomprehensibly miniscule part of the universe was somehow conducive to life whilst the rest of the universe was militating against the possibility, so to speak. If this were to be the case then the existence of God, an omnipotent Being capable of holding back the anti-life tendencies of the rest of the universe, would surely be highly probable. Probably the strongest argument for the Strong Anthropic Principle is the HAM-TOE itself precisely because it requires the existence of consciousness as a force internal to the process of universal and sentient evolution; it requires conscious agents to perceive the universe in order to manifest the universe as a going concern, the universe must produce sentient beings in order to be a fully experienced universe. Universes without sentient beings can not be said ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 875 to „really‟ exist; they are in point of fact just failed impotent universes, hovering in a limbo of non-experienced potentiality. It must be pointed out that the term „sentient beings‟ means all sentient beings not just human beings. Apparently Brandon Carter, instigator of the Anthropic paradigm, regretted the choice of term because it appeared to leave out all species apart from humans and this was not his intention. However, Hawking and Mlodinow seem to place universes which come into an experienced fullness of being and universes which mutely hover in expectant potentiality on the same level, despite the fact that their own presentation which we have previously surveyed clearly indicates that this is incorrect: …our universe seems to be one of many, each with different laws … now the entire observable universe – is only one of many, just as our solar system is one of many. This means that the environmental coincidences are rendered unremarkable by the realization that billions of such universes exist, the fine tunings of the laws of nature can be explained by the existence of multiple universes. [p165] But this conclusion is reached by ignoring the dramatic difference between universes which are given the existential thumbs up by the approval of the inhabitants and those which are weeded out by not meeting the requirements of its inhabitants (they don‟t like Roquefort cheese!). This difference is clearly implicated within the core details of the HAM-TOE itself, but somehow gets ignored in the closing stages of The Grand Design. There are universes which are actualized by the operation of consciousness acting through the sentient organisms inhabiting the universe and, on the other hand, potential universes which simply die a death, or at least remain in an existential limbo, through lack of attention! It seems that Hawking and Mlodinow want to claim that the Roquefort cheese Moon universe somehow still „exists,‟ or subsists, with the same existential status as the Moon-rock universe that we actually inhabit; but this cannot be the case because on the basis of their own TOE the Moon-rock universe is experientially and thereby actually actual! The inescapable conclusion of the above consideration is that the presence of consciousness alters the existential status of the universe in a dramatic fashion. The analytical psychologist C. G. Jung summed up his view of the crucial universal role of consciousness as follows: …man is indispensable for the completion of creation, … in fact he himself is the second creator of the world, who alone has given to the world its objective existence … (without consciousness) it would have gone on in the profoundest night of non-being down to its unknown end. Human consciousness created objective existence and meaning…23 In the light of the HAM-TOE this observation on the part of Jung was remarkably prescient, but perhaps we should not be too surprised as Jung had discussed issues of the interconnection of mind and matter implied by quantum physics with the quantum physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who was a patient of his. Jung proposed the notion of the emergence of experience from a realm of archetypes, which are preexisting modes of potential experience, a view which clearly resonates powerfully with quantum theory. Jung had conducted a meticulous investigation of the symbolic and mythological material of the world‟s diverse cultures and as a result he was able to demonstrate that there are recurring themes and motifs which were exemplified in different specifics. This led him to his notion of an archetype: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 876 There are as many archetypes as there are typical situations in life. Endless repetition has engraved these experiences into our psychic constitution, not in the form of images filled with content, but at first only as forms without content, representing merely the possibility of a certain type of perception and action. When a situation occurs that corresponds to a given archetype, that archetype becomes activated…24 Archetypes, therefore, can be thought of as subjective propensities to experience our experience certain ways. Furthermore, archetypes are „created‟ through a long chain of repetition of experience; they are the potential forms of possible experience produced by the repeated experience of all sentient beings inhabiting a universe. In his work as psychologist Jung was primarily concerned with working with archetypes which were relevant to the integration of the psychic functioning of his patients. Generally these would be related to what Jung termed the individuation process whereby aspects of the individual psyche were helped to integrate and co-ordinate in a harmonious fashion. But Jung also extended his interest in integration to deeper religious and philosophical levels in his investigations into alchemy with its emphasis on the interpenetration of psyche and the material world which he articulated in the concept of the Unus Mundus, the „Unitary World‟ within which there are contained infinite paths of experiential exploration; a proposal which provides a fertile metaphor for the universal functioning described by Hawking and Mlodinow, once, that is, the cosmic force of consciousness and awareness is given its rightful central place in the process of the universe (or „Unus Munus‟). According to Jung‟s vision of the unified, yet at the same time infinitely diverse, „Unus Munus,‟ the realms of mind and matter are different expression of a deeper underlying process, just like Bohm‟s implicate order, and because of this there is a possibility of „synchronistic‟ events in which the realms of matter and mind seem to mimic each other. In his book Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics Stapp concludes his thoughts regarding Pauli‟s interpretation of the ideas of Jung in the context of quantum physics as follows: …if the quantum and the synchronistic processes are indeed essentially the same process, then an empirical window may have been opened on the process that had been thought by quantum theorists to lie beyond the ken of empirical knowledge.25 And the process that Stapp is referring to here is the creation of the experiential domains of individuated mind and the material world from a deeper level of „archetypal‟ potentiality. If we apply Jung‟s terminology to the vision of the HAM-TOE then we could say that at the moment of the Big-Bang the universal process produces a vast cosmic maze of archetypal potentiality awaiting activation by the multitude of sentient beings traversing the web of cosmic possibility; a vision reminiscent of the Argentinean writer Jorge Luis Borges‟ short story The Garden of Forking Paths. However, in the version emerging in this investigation it would seem that, rather than all possibilities being realised as in the cases in Borges‟ story, the science-fiction fantasy of the popularised many-worlds quantum interpretation and the HAM-TOE, the consciousnesses of all sentient beings are likely to play a creative role by selecting pathways in the archetypal cosmic maze of possibilities. The physicist Amit Goswami describes this view: Suppose that the parallel universes of the many-worlds theory are not material but archetypal in content. Suppose they are universes of the mind. Then, instead of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 877 saying that each observation splits off a branch of the material universe, we can say that each observation makes a causal pathway in the fabric of possibilities in the transcendent domain of reality. Once the choice is made, all except one of the pathways are excluded from the word of manifestation.26 The homomorphism between Goswami‟s proposal and the HAM-TOE should not need labouring! In their explorations of the analogies between the realms of the quantum world and the world of the human psyche, Jung and Pauli were convinced that mind and matter were themselves complementary aspects of a deeper level of reality in the same way that waves and particles were thought at the time to be complementary aspects of quantum reality. So in just the same way as the archetypes of the human mind could give structure to the inner world of the psyche it made complementary sense for an archetypal process involving „subjective‟ propensities for experience to create, or impose, structure upon the multiple possibilities within the potentialities of the archetypal realm underlying the seemingly material world. Pauli was so convinced of the idea that the realm of the „physical‟ and that of „mind‟ must be seamlessly linked at a deep level of reality that he wrote in a letter to a friend: When he speaks of „reality‟ the layman usually means something obvious and well known, whereas it seems to me that precisely the most important and extremely difficult task of our time is to work on elaborating a new idea of reality. This is also what I mean when I always emphasize that science and religion must be related in some way.27 And it is quite clear that the link between science and religion can only be located in the central efficacious role of consciousness in the process of reality. According to the HAMTOE: We are the product of quantum fluctuations in the very early universe. [p139] This conclusion clearly draws the creative role of consciousness at the quantum level centre stage, for, as we have seen, the HAM-TOE requires that consciousness plays a vital role in the evolution of the universe. If it is the case that consciousness plays such a hugely significant creative role in the HAM-TOE, drawing out experienced actuality from the quantum potentialities radiated out from the point of the Big Bang creation, then it can only make sense that consciousness is a significant, in fact probably major component of the universal process of reality. In fact a significant number of respected physicists and philosophers are now converging on the possibility that consciousness is a central feature of reality operating through the quantum ground. The physicists Bruce Rosenblum and Fred Kuttner, in their important book Quantum Enigma: Physics encounters consciousness, are clearly making such a claim regarding the far reaching implications of quantum theory: The physical reality of an object depends on how you choose to look at it. Physics had encountered consciousness but did not yet realize it.28 And: Consciousness and the quantum enigma are not just two mysteries; they are the two mysteries; … Quantum mechanics seems to connect the two.29 The majority of the founding fathers also came to such a view, a notable exception being Einstein. According to Schrödinger, for instance: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 878 Mind has erected the objective outside world … out of its own stuff.30 And Max Planck came to a similar conclusion: All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.31 More recently, in an article in the New Scientist (23rd June 2007) Michael Brooks, commenting on quantum entanglement experiments carried out by teams led by Markus Aspelmeyer of the Austrian Academy of Sciences and Anton Zeilinger of the University of Vienna, tells us that the conclusion reached by the physicists involved is that: … we now have to face the possibility that there is nothing inherently real about the properties of an object that we measure. In other words measuring those properties is what brings them into existence. 32 And Vlatko Vedral, quantum researcher at the University of Leeds commented that: Rather than passively observing it, we in fact create reality. 33 The headline for the article proclaims that: To track down a theory of everything, we might have to accept that the universe only exists when we are looking at it…34 The evidence is inexorably stacking up in favour of the view that the ultimate nature of the process of reality is mind-like, or idea-like, as Stapp puts it. However, in their final chapter Hawking and Mlodinow, despite having clearly outlined overwhelming evidence for the primacy of consciousness in earlier portions of their book, perform a staggering volte-face and start backing away from the conclusion. At the outset of this chapter we are reminded that the two fundamental questions that the authors set out to provide answers for are 1) why is there something rather than nothing and 2) why do we exist? Furthermore they claim that they can answer the questions without any need for a creator entity or divine being. Any appropriate and satisfactory model of the ultimate genesis of the process of universe must „create a reality of its own,‟ which is to say that the nature of the ultimate source of the process of reality must be such that the dualistic world that we experience must be self-consistently and coherently generated by the internal nature of the ultimate principle, it is not valid to introduce aspects and entities out of the blue. As an „example that can help us think about issues of reality and creation‟ we are treated to an exposition of the „Game of Life‟ which was „invented‟ in 1970 by James Conway (figure 2). This „game‟ consists of a grid within which cells of the grid are filled or unfilled according to very simple rules regarding the state of surrounding cells, filled cells are said to be „live‟: 1) A live square with 2 or 3 live neighbours survives (remains filled). 2) A dead square with 2 or 3 live neighbours becomes a live cell (gets filled in). 3) All other squares are dead (remain unfilled) or die (get unfilled). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 879 Figure 2 When the game is run on a computer it is found that various stable configurations of „live‟ cells („gliders‟ for instance) „emerge‟ following „rules which seem unrelated to the simple rules underlying the simulation. Hawking and Mlodinow‟s seeming disownment of their earlier insights emerges when they say that: In a physical universe, the counterparts of objects such as gliders in the Game of Life are isolated bodies of matter. [p179] The relationship of such „bodies of matter‟ to the primal „stuff‟ of reality and the rules from which they supposedly emerge is simply not addressed. However Hawking and Mlodinow do say of the Game: However, it is easy to imagine that slightly more complicated laws would allow complex systems with all the attributes of life. Imagine an entity of that type, an object in a Conway-type world. Such an object would respond to environmental stimuli, and hence appear to make decisions. Would such life be aware of itself? Would it be self-conscious? [p178] Perhaps a more appropriate question is would a Conway-type „life‟ which was not aware or conscious or even, perhaps, self-conscious to some degree warrant the designation „life‟. The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein in his later work the Philosophical Investigations warned against being „bewitched‟ by certain uses of language to unwittingly jump to inappropriate conclusions. In the above case for instance is it really appropriate to describe the completely mechanical rule-driven patterns of apparent interaction as a response to environmental stimuli? In this sleight of mind, probably unconscious on the part of the authors, words which can have application across the domains of the purely mechanical (the „response‟ of a servomechanism) and the intentional (as in giving a „response‟ to a question) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 880 are used as an illicit and unjustified bridge from the purely mindless realm of rule-driven mechanism into the assumption of the possibility of mindful intentional behaviour from a basis of mindlessness. This in itself can lead to appalling mindlessness, as when Daniel Dennett asserts that: An impersonal, unreflective, robotic, mindless little scrap of molecular machinery is the ultimate basis of all the agency, and hence meaning, and hence consciousness, in the universe.35 As the philosopher Gregg Rosenberg, in his book A Place for Consciousness, has pointed out the „Game of Life‟ is driven by „bare differences‟ („on‟ and „off‟) and the qualitative world of consciousness cannot „emerge‟ from relationships of bare difference; any qualitative aspects one might think lurks in the pure mechanism is purely in the mind of the beholder. But, in point of fact, we do not need Rosenberg‟s, or any one else‟s, refutation of mind emerging from complete mindlessness because, as we have seen, the HAM-TOE requires potentiality and consciousness to be hovering in the wings of creation expectedly waiting, as it were, to make a bid for full existence and thereby produce „the greatest show on earth,‟ to borrow a title of one of Richard Dawkins‟ materialism-centered books on evolution. In his book Life Without Genes Adrian Woolfson presents us with a poetic vision of the sort of field of potentiality that he imagines must have „existed‟ before the dawn of life within the universe: In the beginning there was mathematical possibility. At the very inception of the universe fifteen billion years ago, a deep infinite-dimensional sea emerged from nothingness. Its colourless waters, green and turquoise blue, glistened in the nonexistent light of the non-existent sun … A strange sea though, this information sea. Strange because it was devoid of location …36 Ignoring the apparently endemic misguided notion that a vast realm of experience can magically arise from complete absence, Woolfson‟s, strangely haunting, suggestion is that there must have been some kind of field of potentiality at the inception of the universe. Although there was not a fully manifested and experienced reality there was, according to his picture, which clearly echoes aspects of the HAM-TOE, what he calls a „mathematical possibility‟. This field can only be the quantum wavefunction of the universe, a universal wavefunction of potentiality that contains: …all possible histories … through which the universe could have evolved to its present state…37 In the beginning, of course, the wavefunction of the universe would contain all the future evolutionary possibilities: The information sea is thus a quantum mechanical sea, composed from infinite repertoires of entangled quantum descriptions.38 But as evolution proceeds some possibilities must be weeded out, as in the HAM-TOE. Within this all encompassing wavefunction all possibilities for evolutionary manifestation are encoded. From out of the vast entangled web of infinite possibilities for manifestation only certain privileged members will actually make it into reality, so to speak: An information space of this sort would furnish a complete description of all potentially living and unrealizable creatures…39 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 881 It therefore follows that there is a sort of design woven into the potentialities for evolution; it is a vast complex design of all possible manifestations written into the quantum wavefunction of the universe standing on the very edge of time. But a wavefunction is a purely mathematical construct, it tells us nothing about the „substance‟ of reality so to speak, using the term „substance‟ in the Cartesian sense of the category of reality which stands under the realm of experience: mind or matter? As we have seen the best answer that can now be given is that ultimate reality must have mind-like or consciousness-like qualities because prior to the universal manifestation there must be an infinite pool of potentiality which is subsequently activated by the operation of consciousness „selecting‟ its infinitely multiple paths from out of the web of cosmic potentialities which are radiated out at the moment of the Big Bang. The latest formulation of this view is enshrined in the notion that the grounding substance of reality is „information,‟ or at least informational. This view is explored in Vlatko Vedral‟s book Decoding Reality and the soon to be published set of essays Information and the Nature of Reality: From Physics to Metaphysics, edited by Paul Davies and Niels Henrik Gregersen. The following is from the introduction to Information and the Nature of Reality: Davies suggests that instead of taking mathematics to be primary, followed by physics and then information, the picture should be inverted in our explanatory scheme, so that we find the conceptual hierarchy: information → laws of physics → matter. Lloyd‟s view of the computational nature of the universe develops this understanding by treating quantum events as „quantum bits‟ or qubits, whereby the universe „registers itself.‟40 The first point to note is the absence of consciousness from the metaphysical chain of the development of reality. This is not to say that the notion of consciousness does not play an important part in the essays in the book, this would be both impossible and ridiculous. But, despite all the evidence of the central creative role that consciousness plays in the unfoldment of the experiential world from the quantum realm, it seems that it is still the case that any other concept is preferred as being foundational; keep consciousness on the margins as much as possible still seems to be a useful maxim for scientific publications. It seems that consciousness is felt to be, well, too immaterial to really get the job of manifesting a material world accomplished. Now it seems that in this new paradigm it has been realised that mathematics is probably just as immaterial as consciousness and so perhaps „information‟ might do a better job as the metaphysical support of reality! But information on its own is clearly not enough to get a universe of experience under way, the words on the pages of a closed book are „information,‟ but they do not do their job of meaning something until someone opens the book and starts reading. It requires the active intervention of consciousness to bring inert information into life and meaning. This is why within Buddhist philosophy the ground of reality is characterised as being a fundamental ground comprised of „emptiness and cognition inseparable‟, „emptiness and luminosity‟ or „empty cognizance‟.41 The field consists of „empty‟ potentiality for manifested experience, „empty‟ in the sense of being no particular thing but the basis for the potentiality of all things; and furthermore and crucially it is a field of potentiality which has internal to it the nature of „luminosity‟ or „cognizance‟ which is the function of becoming aware and unfolding of the potentialities contained within the field. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 882 In this context a very brief look at quantum field theory is illuminating. In his recent book Quantum Reality: Theory and Philosophy Jonathan Allday, in a section he entitles „Substance Abuse‟, tells us that within quantum field theory, at the lowest level so to speak, there is no substance, the quantum field is actually „empty‟ of substance. He writes: Now, from a philosophical point of view, this is rather big stuff. Our whole manner of speech … rather naturally makes us think that there is some stuff or substance on which properties can, in a sense, be glued. It encourages us to imagine taking a particle and removing its properties one by one until we are left with a featureless „thing‟ devoid of properties, made from the essential material that had the properties in the first place. Philosophers have been debating the correctness of such arguments for a long time. Now, it seems, experimental science has come along and shown that, at least at the quantum level, the objects we study have no substance to them independent of their properties.42 Because there is no substantiality (and here Allday is using the term substance to indicate „matter‟) within quantum field theory the term „particle‟ is dropped and the term „qaunta‟ is used, and these are „objects which have properties but not substances‟.43 Another fundamental feature of quantum field theory is that fields are said to capable of creating and destroying quantum states; mathematically this is represented by creation and destruction operators. But can we give some indication of what is really going on? Well if we adopt Seth Lloyd‟s proposal that a quantum event, or „qubit,‟ is a result of the universe „registering itself‟ then it would seem that we would have to say that such events are the result of a deep level of consciousness acting within the quantum field in question, how else could the universe register itself? Our analysis has clearly indicated that at the fundamental quantum level there is only empty potentiality for qualitative experience and the internal cognitive function of consciousness to account for any activity, which is clearly in line with quantum field theory. This suggestion also conforms with our discovery that where physicists discover mathematical equations which suggest that something is appearing by the magical operation of mathematics upon „nothingness,‟ in reality so to speak this indicates consciousness operating to unfold quantum potentialities, in this case the potentialities for low level experiential properties, or quantum qualitative events, from emptiness, which is the infinite potentiality for qualitative manifestation. This view is a kind of quantum pan-experientialism based on the implication that the entire edifice of the so-called „classical‟ world of dualistic experience ripples up from a quantum ground through a multitude of resonant levels of quantum functioning, all driven by the creative „force‟ of the universal inner cognitive functioning which is an innate aspect of the quantum realm. Such a view is clearly consonant with the recent quantum „epiontic‟ perspective, or „quantum Darwinism‟, proposed by Wojciech Zurek and his associates: …quantum states, by their very nature share an epistemological and ontological role – are simultaneously a description of the state, and the „dream stuff is made of.‟ One might say that they are epiontic. These two aspects may seem contradictory, but at least in the quantum setting, there is a union of these two functions.44 The idea here is that there is an epistemological, or perceptual, function within the fabric of quantum „dream stuff‟ which fabricates the seeming world of ontological solidity through its ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 883 operation within quantum potentiality. Each „epiontic‟ movement of the quantum dream stuff by which the universe registers, or perceives, itself produces a flicker of awareness, or consciousness, which constitutes a tiny momentary glimmer of experience, and as the upward cascade of such flickers of consciousness or experience reaches „higher‟, more dualistic levels, the qualitative nature of the experiential awareness is amplified until it individuates in sentient consciousness. As Gregg Rosenberg says: Large-scale, enduring, coherent experiencers may be extremely rare. As a dilution of traditional panpsychism, the panexperientialism we may end up with may be as benign as would occur it the interactions between very simple atoms and molecules mainly produced flashes of extraordinary simple and brief feeling, like fireflies quietly flickering in the night. For these reasons, referring to the experiences of noncognitive systems as proto-conscious rather than conscious is really best.45 In other words the panexperientialist perspective being suggested does not entail that rocks think or feel pain. It is, rather, the case that the upward cascade of the creative cognitive force of the quantum realm produces the sentient beings within which the cognitive tendencies of the quantum realm are amplified into individuated experiencing centers of awareness or consciousness. All such sentient beings are located within an apparently solidified realm of materiality which contains them. However, it is always useful to keep in mind that what appears to be the solidified „material‟ world is not what it appears to be, it is 99.9999999999 percent (or thereabouts) empty space; it is a more akin to a quantum force field created by the perceptive activities of all sentient beings, as suggested by Wheeler. This is also an implication of the HAM-TOE and, as Hawking and Mlodinow say, „it is not science fiction.‟ We are now in a position to resuscitate the notion of God after the Hawking and Mlodinow failed assassination attempt. However it must be made clear that the concept of God which can be revived is not that which is conceived of by most Christians. The existence of an independent creator God which is required by mainstream, non-mystical Christianity certainly cannot be rescued by a quantum expedition. The problem with the notion of God as it is enshrined in Christian doctrine and practice is the large amount of religious and cultural baggage that comes along with it, baggage which in no way could ever logically follow from any resurrected quantum divine principle; significant examples would be the virgin birth and the resurrection for instance. The philosophical theologian Keith Ward has argued in his essay „God as the Ultimate Informational Principle‟ for a view of God as: …the supreme informational principle of the universe, without which the combination of the lawfulness of the world and its inherent value would be inexplicable. Such informational code for construction of an actual universe logically precedes material configurations by containing the set of all mathematically possible states, plus a selective principle of evaluation that gives preference to the actual world we inhabit.46 A significant observation which should be immediately apparent, apart from the fact that this view seems to have a very tenuous connection with the traditional notion of God, is that this proposal closely resembles the Buddhist view that the ultimate ground comprises an infinitely fecund field of potentiality from which all experience manifests together with some ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 884 mechanism through which potentialities are unfolded; Ward calls this mechanism „a selective principle of evaluation.‟ The crucial difference between Ward‟s novel vision of God as ultimate informational principle and the Buddhist notion of emptiness and cognizance inseparable, however, resides in the nature of the selection mechanism. In his book Why There Almost Certainly Is a God Ward gives an account of his „God hypothesis‟ which clearly maps quite snugly on to the HAM-TOE model in all but one detail: The God hypothesis proposes that there is a consciousness that does not depend upon any material brain, or any material thing at all. in this consciousness all possible worlds exist, though only as possible states that may or may not exist. The cosmic consciousness can evaluate these possible worlds in terms of their desirability – their beauty or elegance or fecundity, for example. Then, being actual, it can bring about desirable states and enjoy them.47 The first part of this metaphysical vision is isomorphic to the HAM-TOE in that it proposes that the universe comes into being as a vast web of potentiality, possible worlds or possible pathways of experience. As we have seen a logical analysis of the structure of the HAMTOE clearly shows that this vast maze of cosmic potentiality must be of the nature of consciousness or mind. However, when it comes to specifying the selection mechanism by which a privileged set of these potentialities becomes actual Ward falls back upon the traditional view of the omnipotence of God. According to Ward‟s proposal it is God, apparently acting as an independent agent taking the position of external cosmic observer firing quantum beams of approval into the world of potential manifestation, who „selects‟ which of the possible worlds are „desirable.‟ But this is not the perspective that is suggested by the HAM-TOE, or any version of quantum theory. The HAM-TOE clearly indicates that it is the community, or communities, of generations of sentient beings weaving their way, and thereby making „selections,‟ through the pathways of potentiality which perform the selection function. The view that it is sentient beings that perform selections upon the quantum realm of potentiality is clearly indicated by quantum theory, as John Wheeler pointed out in his suggestion that „observer-participants‟ are creative agents in the process of a „selfsynthesizing universe‟. As Stapp points out: …quantum theory demands – a draconian shift in the very subject matter of physical theory, from an imagined universe consisting of causally self-sufficient mindless matter, to a universe populated by allowed possible physical actions and possible experienced feedbacks from such actions.48 And, remarkably, this has always been the view of Buddhist metaphysics, as the Dalai Lama indicates (in the following it is necessary to keep in mind that the notion of „karma‟ exactly includes Stapp‟s „possible physical actions and possible experienced feedbacks from such actions‟): From a Buddhist point a view, the karma of all sentient beings that inhabit the universe plays a role in shaping the formation of the universe.49 So if we carry this view, which is suggested by the evidence of quantum theory, into the domain of theology then we can say that all sentient beings are the „observer-participants‟, or the agents, of God. In this view of the process of the universe sentient beings, far from being ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 885 separate from the universal process which constitutes God, are all agents of God‟s intentionality to have a self-aware presence in the dualistic experiential world. We are the „I‟s and „eyes‟ of God! Speaking in April 2003 to the American Physical Society, Wheeler made the following remarkable; perhaps one might say „mystical‟, sequence of remarks: The Question is what is the Question? Is it all a Magic Show? Is Reality an Illusion? What is the framework of the Machine? Darwin‟s Puzzle: Natural Selection? Where does Space-Time come from? Is there any answer except that it comes from consciousness? What is Out There? T‟is Ourselves? Or, is IT all just a Magic Show?50 And in the Guardian obituary for John Wheeler we can read that: In 2002, he wrote: „How come the universe? How come us? How come anything?‟ Although Einstein had once asked him whether, if no one looked at it, the moon continued to exist, Wheeler‟s answer to his „how come?‟ questions was „that‟s us‟.51 Figure 3 Wheeler was well aware that acts of perception were the creative force behind the manifestation of the universe, this was clearly embodied in his self-perceiving universe graphic (figure 3). It only remained for the final step, the extraordinary knowledge known and realised by the great mystics of „all times and all places‟, the fundamental nature of reality is Universal Self-perception. The phenomenon of the „collapse of the wavefunction,‟ the mechanism through which consciousness produces experienced actuality from quantum potentiality, is a direct indication of the fundamental self-perceiving process of the universe. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 886 In other words the universe uses the perceiving process within the dualistic world of experience in order to explore and experience its own nature. Human beings occupy a central place in this process because they are the universe‟s agents (leaving aside the issue of beings elsewhere in the universe) in the process of universal self-exploration, self-perfection and self-transcendence; a universal process of self-discovery which modern theologians may wish to call „God.‟ Steven Hawking was the seventeenth occupant of the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics at Cambridge University. How remarkable then that, when the full implications of the HAMTOE model are properly drawn out, the resulting theological-metaphysical model bears an uncanny resemblance to the theological perspective of the second occupant of the Lucasian Chair, Sir Isaac Newton, who suggested that space was the „sensorium of God.‟ In the Opticks Newton wrote: …does it not appear from phenomena that there is a Being incorporeal, living, intelligent, omnipresent, who in infinite space, as it were in his sensory, sees the things themselves intimately, and thoroughly perceives them, and comprehends them wholly by their immediate presence to himself: of which things the images only carried through the organs of sense into our little sensoriums, are there seen and beheld by that which in us perceives and thinks.52 Whilst in this speculation there is by no means a fully fledged adumbration of the HAMTOE, that would be expecting too much. There is in this musing, however, the glimmer of the idea that at the ground of the process of reality there might be an infinitely potent, innately intelligent awareness which explores its own potentialities through manifesting the „little sensoriums‟ of all sentient beings. As quantum physicist Anton Zeilinger describes John Wheeler‟s quantum conclusion: …since we are part of the universe, the universe, according to Wheeler, creates itself by observing itself through us.53 We are all part of the Grand Designer! 1 Penrose, Roger (2005). The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. Vintage. p1029 2 A sleight modification of Steven Hawkins’ question as to ‘What breaths fire into the equations.’ 3 Penrose, Roger (2005). The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe. Vintage. p1029 Stapp, Henry (1995) – Why Classical Mechanics Cannot Naturally Accommodate Consciousness But Quantum Mechanics Can. 5 Barrow, John D., Davies, Paul C. W., Harper, Charles L. (eds) (2004) Science and Ultimate Reality, Cambridge University Press. p201 – Anton Zeilinger: „Why the quantum? “It” from bit”? A participatory universe? Three far-reaching challenges from John Archibald Wheeler and their relation to experiment.‟ 6 Penrose, Roger (1999). Emperors New Mind. Oxford University Press:1989, Oxford University Press paperback:1999 p295 7 Hawking, Steven & Mlodinow, Leonard (2010). The Grand Design, Bantum Press p131 8 Stapp, Henry (2004). Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993, 2004. p223 9 Vedral, Vlatko (2010). Decoding Reality. Dutton. p211 10 Vedral, Vlatko (2010). Decoding Reality. Dutton. p200 11 Khendrup Norsang Gyatso (2004). Ornament of Stainless Light: An Exposition of the Kalacakra Tantra. Library of Tibetan Classics; Wisdom Publications; Boston. 12 Barrow, John D., Davies, Paul C. W., Harper, Charles L. (eds) (2004) Science and Ultimate Reality, Cambridge University Press. p577 – Wheeler, J A (1999) „Information, physics, quantum: the search for links.‟ In Feynman and Computation: Exploring the Limits of Computers, ed A. J. G. Hey, p309 (314). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. 13 Thrangu Rinpoche, Kenchen (2001). Transcending Ego: Distinguishing Consciousness from Wisdom. Namo Buddha Publication., Boulder, Colorado (2001) p28 4 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| October 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 7 | pp. 864-887 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe 14 887 Untangling the Quantum Entanglement Behind Photosynthesis Berkeley scientists shine new light on green plant secrets « Berkeley Lab News Center.htm 15 Allday, Jonathan (2009). Quantum Reality: Theory and Philosophy, CRC Press. p4 16 BBC Focus Magazine Jan 2009 17 Penrose, Roger (1995). Shadows of the Mind. Oxford University Press:1994, Random House-Vintage:1995 p309 18 Wheeler quoted in Barrow, John D., Davies, Paul C. W., Harper, Charles L. (eds) (2004) Science and Ultimate Reality, Cambridge University Press. p73 – Freeman J. Dyson: „Thought-experiments in honor of John Archibald Wheeler.‟ 19 Michele Caponigro, Xiaojiang Jiang, Ravi Prakesh, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal; „Entanglement: Can We „See‟ the Implicate Order? Philosophical Speculations‟ in NeuroQuantology – September 2010, Vol 8, Issue 3, p382. 20 Bohm, David (2003). The Essential David Bohm ed Nichol, Lee (Routledge, London) p119 21 Stapp, Henry (2004). Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993, 2004. p239 22 Stapp, Henry (2004). Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993, 2004. p192 23 Jung, C.G.(1989). Memories, Dreams and Reflections. Vintage. 24 Jung, C.G.(1989). Memories, Dreams and Reflections. Vintage. p48 25 Stapp, Henry (2004). Mind, Matter and Quantum Mechanics. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993, 2004. p183 26 Goswami, Amit (1995) The Self Aware Universe: How consciousness creates the material world. Tarcher/Penguin, (First published 1993) p140 27 Wolfgang Pauli, letter to M. Fierz, August 12, 1948 28 Rosenblum, Bruce and Kuttner, Fred (2006). Quantum Enigma: Science Encounters Consciousness. Oxford University Press, U.S.A. (2006) p67 29 Rosenblum, Bruce and Kuttner, Fred (2006). Quantum Enigma: Science Encounters Consciousness. Oxford University Press, U.S.A. (2006) p179 30 Schrödinger, E. (1944) What is Life? (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge) p121. 31 Das Wesen der Materie” (The Nature of Matter), speech at Florence, Italy, 1944 (from Archiv zur Geschichte der MaxPlanck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797) 32 Michael Brooks: „The Second Quantum Revolution,‟ New Scientist 23rd June 2007 33 Vlatko Vedral quoted in New Scientist 23rd June 2007 34 New Scientist 23rd June 2007 35 Dennett, Daniel (1991)‟ Consciousness Explained, The Penguin Press, (UK Hardcover edition, 1992) p27 36 Woolfson, Adrian (2000). Life Without Genes. Harper Collins. p74 37 Barrow, D. John & Tipler, Frank J. (1986). The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford University Press. p105 38 Woolfson, Adrian (2000). Life Without Genes. Harper Collins. p83 39 Woolfson, Adrian (2000). Life Without Genes. Harper Collins. p76 40 Davies, Paul & Gregersen, Niels Henrik (eds) (2010) Information and the Nature of Reality- Introduction. p3 41 Schmidt, Marcia Binder (Editor) (2002). The Dzogchen Primer. Shambhala p29 42 Allday, Jonathan (2009). Quantum Reality: Theory and Philosophy, CRC Press. p493 43 Allday, Jonathan (2009). Quantum Reality: Theory and Philosophy, CRC Press. p496 44 Barrow, John D., Davies, Paul C. W., Harper, Charles L. (eds) (2004) Science and Ultimate Reality, Cambridge University Press. p136 – Wojciech H. Zurek: „Quantum Darwinism and envariance.‟ 45 Rosenberg, Gregg (2004). A Place for Consciousness, Oxford University Press. p96 46 Davies, Paul & Gregersen, Niels Henrik (eds) (2010) Information and the Nature of Reality- Introduction. p8 47 Ward, Keith (2008) Why There is Almost Certainly a God, Lion. p80 48 Stapp, Henry (2007). Mindful Universe. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 49 Zajonc, Arthur (Editor) (2004). The New Physics and Cosmology: Dialogues with the Dalai Lama. Oxford University Press. 50 Sarfatti , Jack „Wheeler‟s World: It From Bit?‟ - Internet Science Education Project, San Francisco, CA. 51 Guardian obituary – Michael Carlson 52 Opticks, Query 28 (Appendix A, p 174) 53 Zeilinger, Anton, Internet Essay: On the Interpretation and Philosophical Foundation of Quantum Mechanics. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 691 Article Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View Henrique Pacini* Abstract This paper examines the 2005 book The Singularity is Near: When humans Transcend Biology written by Raymond Kurzweil. The focus lies on the author´s views of exponential growth information technology (IT), which would result in the so called technological singularity. This work attempts to reduce the book´s essence to the main factors necessary for the achievement of artificial intelligence (AI), the main tool for the paradigm shift represented by the singularity. In line with the book, we consider that computational power is the major requirement for the development of AI. We explore three selected preconditions for the continuity of exponential trends: the continuity of economic growth, limited energy usage and the availability of enabling knowledge. The investigation on the demand side points that the trend in energy consumption on computer CPU´s has been decreasing in the last 14 years, even with increasingly more powerful processors. On the supply side, Kurzweil´s reliance on photovoltaics as a major future source of energy seems questionable due to the slow rate of improvement this technology has had during recent years. The final part of the work observes the characteristics of different types of statistical growth, and draw parallels between Kurzweil´s ideas and similar concepts used in the past. Keywords: Singularity, critical view, Kurzweil, artificial intelligence, information technology, CPU, growth. 1. Introduction Raymond Kurzweil is a well known inventor, businessman and writer. Kurzweil´s name is mostly associated with the piano and music synthesizer company he founded, whose products are labeled after his name. Kurzweil also launched a number of parallel companies, ranging from text-to-speech technologies to literature on life-extending nutrition. According to his own self-description, Kurzweil embodies the definition of a futurist. Kurzweil´s predictions are based mainly in the field of Information Technology. By analyzing specific trends in this sector, he extrapolates development predictions based on the interfaces that IT-based technologies have with other sectors of the human society. In recent years – more precisely after 2005 – Kurzweil´s name rose to the spotlight due to his feats as an author on future studies. This paper is interested in examining the potential problems for the materialization of Kurzweil´s IT development predictions, which are present on his 2005 book The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. This paper recognizes the criticism on Kurzweil´s ideas, but refrains from taking part in this discussion. Instead, the investigation focuses solely on the conceptual merit of the energy * Correspondence: Henrique Pacini, Department of Energy Technology, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden E-mail: pacini@kth.se ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 692 component associated to the increasing computational power hypothetically required for the attainment of strong artificial intelligence – and the singularity. 1.1 Kurzweil´s 2005 book: The Singularity is Near As a follow up to two previous books on future studies, namely The Age of Intelligent Machines (1990) and The Age of Spiritual Machines (1999), Kurzweil published in 2005 an updated work entitled The singularity if Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. The book attempted to predict some of the main changes to the human society that will happen in the next decades, based on the observation of past and ongoing evolutionary trends in key technologies considered by the author as fundamental impact on near and mid-term future. The main difference between Kurzweil´s 1999 and 2005 books is that the later picked up on fast-changing technological developments that were happening in the early 2000´s, such as the increased understanding of the human genome, the maintenance of Moore´s law 1 accelerating computer performance and the whole debate of sustainability in energy systems. Altogether, the development trends analyzed in the book were converging, according to Kurzweil´s argumentation, to a technological singularity2 which would take place near the year of 2045. The scope of this paper is limited to the essence of the book, which is the development of ICT based on increasingly powerful computer technology. Although inputs from other fields of knowledge will be necessary for Kurzweil´s predictions to be fulfilled, it is clear in his work that the prime carrier of change is the continued exponential growth in computing power which will allow the emergence of artificial intelligence, which still according to his predictions, is likely to be the fundamental driver for the achievement of the singularity. For a better understanding of the foreseen development trend in ICT envisioned by Kurzweil, follows an evolution line based on information extracted from his 2005 book. Understanding of human Brain + Strong AI (computer passing the Turing Test) 2020s Mind Uploading + Widespread Nanotechnology Singularity 2030s 2040s According to the timeline of events in the book, in the next decades the speed of computers will continue to rise in an exponential manner, that is, Moore´s law will continue to be valid. This will be accompanied by an exponential decrease in costs per unit of processing power, 1 Gordon Moore is one of the founders of the INTEL corporation, whose April 1965 publication in Electronics Magazine became known in the IT sector as Moore´s law. This is due to the observed trend in the electronics industry that the number of transistors in an integrated circuit seems to double every two years. 2 Technological singularity can be defined as a moment in time where technological evolution shifts from exponential to a quasi-hyperbolic growth, resulting in major societal, identity and philosophical paradigm shifts. See: Vernor (1993), Joy (2000), Kurzweil (2005), Hanson (2008). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 693 transmission bandwidth and storage capacities.3 This trend, still according to Kurzweil, will allow increasingly more complex systems to be simulated. With the inputs from existing knowledge bases and ongoing inputs from neuroscience4, this development trend in computer power will lead to a full understanding of the brain in the 2020´s. The next step will be the uptake of real-time simulation of the human brain, what will turn into the start point of upscaled artificial intelligence, the motor of a new economic revolution. Kurzweil´s makes usage of various empirical time series to justify the perceived evolutionary trends in ICT technologies. As an example of perceived exponential trends, he mentions the number of transistors in computer processors, the number of published scientific papers, decreasing cost per unit of computer memory, data bandwidth, et cetera. This paper makes two fundamental assumptions, which are also present in the postulates of Kurzweil´s work and help as to narrow the focus of discussion: - The singularity is an achievable state of technology. The brain is structured according to rules, which while complex, are deterministic in nature. It can be therefore understood, simulated and upscaled. That said, the scope of this work is limited to examining a few shortcomings in the proposed law of accelerating change (Kurzweil 2001), which is the foundation of the technological change that could make such deep transformations to occur. How would his predictions stand, if sustainability considerations are in place? In other words, can the singularity still be achieved given economic, knowledge and energy constraints? 2. Requirements for the achievement of the singularity First let us restrict the analysis to its fundamental components. Kurzweil postulates that key technologies, spearheaded by the progress in computation power, are experiencing exponential growth, what operates a multiplicator effect via spillovers to other sectors of the economy. Similarly to a schumpeterian model of business cycles, Kurzweil says that recurring cycles of evolution happen due to improvements based on the exponential growth. Each new improvement cycle, for example, the doubling of the number of transistors in an integrated circuit every two years, represents the creation of a refined tool that improves capacity. This continues until enough capacity and tools have been accumulated, as to allow a paradigm shift (i.e. revolution) to take place. For the analysis of the research question – which factors might make it difficult to achieve the so called singularity – this paper will break this process in its constituent parts. 3 All these three trends were plotted with empirical data in Kurzweil´s work. See Kurzweil (2005). Proposed technologies to map and simulate a virtual brain are improved brain imaging techniques with sufficient resolution and nanotech bots for brain mapping. This does not exclude, but is indeed complementary to parallel other approaches such as the accurate modeling of individual neurons, synapses, according to Kurzweil. 4 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 694 Mechanism of approach to the Singularity Paradigm shift Emergence of Artificial Intelligence Computers Economic Growth Energy Enabling Knowledge For abstraction purposes we shall imagine that economies are essentially reduced to the classical inputs of capital and labour. These two inputs do not have a perfect substitution rate, because neither capital or labour are homogenous. In other words, capital and labor have different rates of return, for a given economic activity. Capital has been substituting lowskilled labor for centuries in human societies 5 , but it is struggling to substitute highly dispersed and low energy tasks such as cleaning and cooking. The same is valid for highly skilled labor, such as researchers, interpreters and artists, all professions which so far see no threat coming from machines. Zeira (2007) shows that grown can be achieved by capital deepening and labour being concentrated in the sectors where it still has a higher rate of return. The parallel with Kurzweil happens when capital (machines) manage to completely replace labour, even in the hardest sectors (R&D). This could fuel very fast economic growth, as machines would likely outperform humans in cognitive, precision and speed capabilities. The paradigm shift6, or singularity, requires the existence of such a revolutionary growth mechanism, considered by Kurzweil to be artificial intelligence (AI). Further backtracking, AI requires the right set of enabling tools for coming into existence. Let us consider the three main factors determining the creations of these tools to be: (1) Economic growth (2) Sufficient energy supply and (3) Enabling Knowledge.7 2.1 Economic growth Kurzweil´s views of the importance of technology to development are to a certain extent backed by economic growth theory (Sollow, 1957; Romer; 1990). Independently on whether technology is seen as exogenous (Sollow) or endogenous (Romer) to the economy, technology development is eventually the decisive factor determining long-term growth. 5 Maybe the best example of large-scale labour substitution by capital is the Industrial Revolution. It shall be noticed that the large availability of energy due to the steam technology made machines more cost-effective than labourers at many manufacture lines. 6 See Kuhn (1962) 7 There are numerous other specific factors that could be considered (such as nanotechnology, genetic engineering, medicine and life extension, etc). For simplification and modeling purposes we will consider only the three main aggregate, keeping in mind that there are strong correlations among them. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 695 The importance of economic growth is an established consensus in economic theory, and often the final goal of government policy due to numerous benefits it unlocks. Growth and spillovers have been obvious elements in the modern computer industry. Fueled by the increase in average incomes worldwide during the 1980s, joint the advent of the personal computer, the IT industry experienced unheard levels of demand during the 1990s and 2000s, even managing to overcome sector-specific problems and continuing to grow.8 Given the present structure of the computer industry, there is a heavy dependence in economies of scale and standardization of products. This leads us to an interesting aspect of the computer industry: Each new generation of computer technology requires increasingly larger investments to reach the market (Sumner and Krazit 2005). Given that continuous, exponential innovation is the main mechanism in Kurzweil´s predictions, a sustained economic growth seems necessary to allow firms to continue technology-oriented investments. These, in the same circular logic, would then be able to maintain the pace necessary to feed an exponential growth in the sectors leading to the singularity (e.g. computer processing power). There are however limits for the growth of IT markets: The share of ICT products per household is high in developed countries and smaller in lower income regions of the world. However, there has been a rapid growth in ICT sectors in the developing world (Graph 1) Graph 1 – Growing markets for ICT in developing countries Source: International Telecommunication Union Assuming that developing countries open to trade tend to grow faster than developed countries (catch-up effect), and that the computer markets are highly international, we can deduce that the market for computers – on all its forms – is driven by two major driving mechanisms: (A) – The speed with which the digital divide is bridged; (B) – The seasonal replacement of computers in IT-saturated markets. The growth in the computer industry is fueled by both (A) and (B), in other words, the untapped market potential of developing countries plus the replacement of existing IT capital in highly developed markets such as Sweden (where small percentual growth potential remains). 8 One example is the Dot-com market bubble which sharply depreciated shares of IT firms in 2000. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 696 The absolute amount of resources spent on ICT products in developed countries like Sweden could be seen as a theoretical limit for computer markets; with the entire world population enjoying ICT in the same standards as Sweden, there will be no more accelerated growth due to fading catch-up effect in developing countries. Instead, the ICT demand will be determined by the frequency of replacement of existing hardware – a highly significant, but not exponentially-growing market. One extra issue that could affect the growth necessary for the singularity to be achieved should be mentioned. The Singularity is Near has been published before the Stern Report from 2006 and the IPCC 4th assessment report of 2007 . As a matter of fact, not much focus has been given to the potential that global temperature increases could have in de-accelerating the international economy. If ongoing and near-future initiatives to mitigate climate change fail to curb temperature increases, considering Stern and IPCC forecasts to be valid, an economic de-acceleration could occur. This could mean by consequence that the ICT industry might be affected and forced to scale back technology investments, jeopardizing Kurzweils scenarios. 2.2 Energy Demand There has been some debate on whether computer power can sustain its observed growth as of 2009. Let us look into energy considerations in this section. Today the dominant architecture in the supercomputer industry is basically the same as in the consumer segments. Supercomputers are built by massive parallelization of consumer-grade parts. Mainly after the Pentium 4 series of microprocessors, limitations in serial processing (e.g. overheating issues when clock speeds go above 3-4 gigahertz per core) became evident. However, there seems to be a creative trend in the computer industry which circumvents the overheating problem. Instead of faster single processors, the computation cores are now being assembled in parallel architecture, using multiple processors with better memory allocation. This allows even slower processors – considering clock speeds – to display better net performance. How about the power consumption of computer processor? Kurzweil´s work has not performed a demand-side analysis of energy aspects. If an exponential increase in power demand for every new generation of processors is verified to be taking place, this could result in severe difficulties for a continuous exponential growth in the sector. Some empirical data from a computer benchmark firm can give some insights on the trends in power consumption in the computer processor segment.9 Observe Graphs 2, 3 and 4: 9 Figures extracted from Tom´s Hardware Guide and Intel technical reports. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 697 Power consumption (W/h) 140 120 y = 10.459e0.164x R² = 0.8904 100 80 60 40 20 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Year Graph 2. CPU Power Consumption: 1993 – 2007. Average of AMD and Intel processors. Watts per megahertz 0.12 0.1 0.08 y = 0.1266e-0.147x R² = 0.886 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Graph 3. CPU Energy-performance: 1993 – 2007. In watts per megahertz. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 698 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Increase in power consumption Increase in energy efficiency Graph 4. Energy efficiency increased faster than power consumption in microprocessors 1993-2007 (Plot of functions extracted from Graph 2 and 3 ) When we compare data from the most common computer processors manufactured by Intel and AMD, it seems clear that even though energy consumption per processor has increased over the period between 1993 and 2007; this has been offset by the megahertz-per-watt figures. The increase in energy efficiency – the measurement of how much processing capacity the CPU can deliver, given the same energy input – increased substantially. Graph 4 compares the weights of both trends (energy consumption vs efficiency increase). The plot demonstrates that the curves never cross each other, meaning that based on empirical data, energy efficiency has grown always faster than energy consumption per CPU. Finally, if this trend persists, energy consumption of processors is unlikely to be an impediment to Kurzweil´s argumentation. 2.3 Energy supply In his reasoning, Kurzweil does not neglect the issue of the world´s pressing demands for cleaner and better energy sources. Namely mentioned in his book is the role of solar cells, which would, according to him, decrease in price and increase in efficiency providing most of the world´s energy needs by the 2020´s. While it is true that Photovoltaics (PV) experienced fast growth in total installed capacity worldwide during recent years, it is also a fact that PV markets are highly concentrated where feed-in tariff mechanisms are in place (Costa, 2009). Less than one percent of the total European energy consumption originates from photovoltaics, and few countries concentrate the bulk of the photovoltaic surface (Germany, Spain and Italy) The author selected information on the price of photovoltaics, comparing it to the price of fossil-based electricity. Even during months of 2008, when oil reached its peak price in recent years, photovoltaics remained uncompetitive. See Graph 5: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 699 Price (U$ cents / KWh) Price of KWh of electricity from Photoltaics vs Oil equivalent (May 2008 - March 2009) 25 20 15 Oil 10 PV 5 0 May-08Apr-08 Jul-08Aug-08Sep-08Oct-08Nov-08Dec-08Jan-09Feb-09Mar-09 Graph 5. Price of kWh of electricity from photovoltaics, compared to oil equivalent. (May 2008 – March 2009). Source: Costa (2009). Problems in the supply of silicon have kept the price of PV high in recent years, and industry forecasts are highly uncertain in regards to future price reductions (Costa 2009). Fossil based energy is still at least fourfold more economical than PV, and as of 2011 there is no strong, internationally applied carbon pricing mechanism to internalize the environmental costs and adjust this cost-benefit relation. Short term fluctuations of fossil energy (e.g. oil prices) might have a negative impact on short-term investments on desirable sources of energy (i.e. photovoltaics), slowing progress in PV development. Apparently, Kurzweil´s bet on photovoltaics is increasingly risky. Unless great improvements in the PV sector occur, boosting conversion efficiencies and bringing down prices, the business-as-usual perspectives for PV are not in line with the prediction of a major energy source for the world´s economy. Even if the growth in photovoltaics materialize as predicted, there are also considerations on whether electricity supply could interfaces with the transport sector. The development of better energy carriers, in the form of high capacity batteries for automotive transport has been a long-standing challenge for energy engineers, and still no efficient solution has been found. The utilization of biofuels and other alternatives could, at best, hedge some of the market against potential costs of emissions-intensive transport. 2.3 Enabling knowledge The availability of knowledge to simulate and upscale the human brain is possibly the most sensitive aspect of Kurzweil´s analysis, given the multiple uncertainties involved. Even with continued economic growth and no energy constraints, hardware capacity is not enough to produce AI. Neuroscience is nowadays subdivided in numerous fields, focusing on physical, biological, chemical and cognitive aspects of the brain. The scope of this work is firmly defined at analyzing the feasibility of Kurzweil´s future predictions. The author will, in this sense, refrain from touching some of the many polemic aspects that this topic can carry. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 700 In a systematic way, it seems reasonable that the understanding of the brain is highly dependent on progress in computational neuroscience. According to Kurzweil, some specific technologies (i.e. Brain imaging techniques coupled with nanotechnology) would allow the structure of the brain to be understood and modeled with sufficient resolution, as to allow the extrapolation of Artificial Intelligence. Kurzweil´s predictions do not exclude, however, other possible paths for the development of AI, as for example bottom-up approaches, such as individual software modules being developed in parallel, and interfacing with each other for the achievement of the same results. In any case, there are a few interesting questions in the way of his predictions. If Kurzweil is right, and brain scans successfully reproduce the physical and electrical structure of the human brain, there is still a problem to be solved. It is ominous in all modern artificial neural networks the fact that they work as universal approximators. That is, they are predictive, but not explanatory tools. Although predictions from neural networks can be highly useful, it is impossible to understand how a process takes place in the inner workings of a neural net. This is why artificial neural networks are also called black boxes (Benitez et al 1997). In this sense, if there are limitations to the understanding on how neural networks process information, there could be difficulties to upscale any simulated brain, condition stated by Kurzweil as necessary for the achievement of super-human intelligence. Firm behavior might also hamper the rate of progress towards a singularity. Technologies that can unlock large business opportunities might inspire anti-competitive behavior. Information asymmetries such as corporate secrecy in AI technologies could, beside monopolistic considerations, hamper the widespread usage of such technology, reducing its effective multiplicator effect throughout economies. As a consequence, the accelerated growth necessary for the singularity would be jeopardized. 3. Discussion Great extent of Kurzweil´s argument is based on his interpretation of the long term evolution of life on planet earth. In his work, a centerpiece is a graph where events with different characteristics, such as the appearance of life on earth, the development of civilizations, agriculture, writing, etc are all plotted in an evolutionary logarithm graph, which is prone to criticism in two points (See: Annex 1): - - Different events / technologies are compared in the same context. The selection of relevant events is arbitrary, and even when different authors are used to reduce bias, the criteria for selection of events remains arbitrary, and prone to limitations of scientific knowledge. If the scope of the book is the singularity, and if ICT is the main driver of this process, so the appropriate evolutionary graph would have to be limited in time to the twentieth century (and not the entire evolution of humankind). The discussion concerning the attainability of the singularity could easily slip into the realm of mathematical philosophy, concerning the characteristics of growth trends. Graph 6 depicts three types of statistical growth. Notice that exponential and sigmoid (S-Curve) growths remain almost identical until the 9th period, but after that point, the sigmoid starts to saturate and stabilizes. The uncertainty related to future predictions in technology makes it impossible ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 701 to know if growth observed now – or in the last hundred years – is been a de-facto exponential or an S-Curve, converging towards stabilization sooner or later. Simply said, this is the pitfall of adaptive expectations, or relying on past trends to forecast the future. Linear Exponential Sigmoid 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Period Graph 6. Types of growth One interesting example of this debate happened in 2007, when a reader (Leonard Skinner) posted the following comment on Kurzweil´s company website: 10 “ When the technological singularity comes, cars will have an infinite number of tailpipes and airbags and razors will have an infinite number of blades. Ok, so that's a little silly, but still - past performance is no guarantee of future results. As for razors and tailpipes, perhaps it may be for microprocessors“ When confronted by this criticism, Kurzweil replied: “Exponentials continue if there is (1) a benefit or reason for it continuing, (2) the resources for it to continue, and (3) a mechanism for it to continue.” Would Kurzweil´s interpretation of exponential trends in ICT be an example of static analysis?11 Static analysis means that a forecast has been based only in past observations. In economics the equivalent term is adaptive expectations. A classic example dates back to the 18th century, in the context of the ongoing industrial revolution Thomas Malthus imagined that the observed population growth would lead to a national disaster in Britain by 1850. By failing to realize the limitations of the industrial revolution in England, Malthus made his flawed predictions based on pure adaptive expectations, thus not realizing that population growth would de-accelerate. The same idea was revisited by Ehrlich (1968) predicting catastrophic population growth during the 1980´s. As a counterargument to the static analysis criticism, Kurzweil could say that his investigation mostly reflects a form of dynamic analysis called rational expectations. This means that, in 10 Discussion thread available at: http://www.sl4.org/archive/0706/16378.html (last accessed 13 August 2009) 11 Static analysis is a pejorative term for when trends are projected into the future simplistically. One simple example is a man who has one child when he is 30 years old. Then another child when he turns 35. A static analysis would conclude that the man will have his eleventh child when he turns 100 years old, not taking into consideration other variables that might influence the trend (e.g. human behavior, aging). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 702 addition to considering past trends, Kurzweil made efforts to avoid bias and made use of the best available information for his forecasts. 4. Conclusion In line with Kurzweil´s answer to Leonard Skinner, there are numerous benefits that could occur in Kurzweil´s envisioned path to the singularity, which are redundant to be mentioned. In regards to resources for exponential trends to continue, there are some doubts whether economic growth in the next decades will be enough to permit increasingly more expensive generations of microprocessors to reach the markets. Additional studies could attempt to quantify the characteristic of this trend – if investments required to produce new microprocessors are also increasing exponentially. Still regarding resources, there is apparently also a trend that processing power increases much faster than energy requirements in CPU´s. This would hold Kurzweil´s argument, but must be seen with caution. The human brain is taken by Kurzweil as model to pursue, still it only consumes 20w of power-equivalent. Large supercomputers today use as much energy as what is produced by a small hydroelectric power plant, to achieve less than one human brain in net performance. In addition to this, photovoltaics, Kurzweil´s bet on photovoltaics as the future of clean energy is still far from even approaching a commercial break even. As of 2011 the bulk of energy generation originates from fossil sources. Given the highly unpredictable nature of knowledge, the mechanism for exponentials to continue, or the emergence of the necessary technologies for the achievement of the singularity, few or no conclusions can be made for this point. However, there could be an underlying effect in line with self-fullfilling prophecies associated with Kurzweil´s books. Just as it inspired this short paper, it could focus the interest of researchers into areas that are fundamental for the singularity to be achieved. It is not unheard that popular literature can bring about strong interest in certain areas, making the mechanism for evolution to come into reality. Perhaps a revised edition of The Singularity is Near, considering the potential dangers of climate change, could give another view towards the path to the singularity. *** Note: The views contained in this article reflect the views of the author only, and not necessarily those of the Royal Institute of Technology. References Aunger, Robert. (2007) Major transitions in „big‟ history. Elsevier Technological Forecasting & Social Change 74 (2007) 1137–1163 Benitez, J. M. Castro, J. L.; Requena, I. (1997) Are Artificial Neural Networks Black Boxes? IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, Vol 8 NO 5. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 703 Costa, Henrique Silva Pacini. (2009) Photovoltaics in the European Context: Conversion Efficiency and the issue of carbon. Journal of Contemporary European Research. p. 114-133 Ehrlich, Paul. (1968) The Population Bomb. Ballantine Books Hanson, Robin. (2008) The Economics of Singularity. IEEE Spectrum Online. June 2008. Avaliable at: http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/jun08/6274 Intel Thermal and Mechanical Design Guidelines, April 2009. Avaliable at: http://download.intel.com/design/processor/designex/315594.pdf Joy, Bill. (2000) Why the future doesn´t need us. Wired Magazine April 2000. Avaliable at: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html Kuhn, Thomas. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press Kurzweil, Raymond. (2005) The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. Viking, New York, 2005 Kurzweil, Ray. (2001). The Law of Accelerating Returns. Published on KurzweilAI.net. March 7, 2001. Avaliable at: http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0134.html?printable=1 Lemon, Sumner; Krazit, Tom. (2005) With chips, Moore´s law is not the problem. Problem of diminishing returns is compounded by rising costs. Infoworld Magazine http://www.infoworld.com/t/hardware/chips-moores-law-not-problem-707 Negrotti, Massimo. (2008) Why the Future Doesn't Come From Machines: Unfounded Prophecies and the Design of Naturoids. Bulletin of Science Technology Society June 17, 2008. Available at: http://bst.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/4/289 Romer, Paul. (1990), Endogenous Technological Change; The Journal of Political Economy Vol 98, no. 5, Part 2 Solow, Robert. (1957), Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function, The Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol.39, No 3, pp. 312-320. Vinge, Vernor. (1993) The Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era. VISION-21 Symposium. Ohio Aerospace Institute, March 30-31. Available at: http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/vinge/misc/singularity.html Zeira, Joseph. (2007) Machines as Engines of Growth. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and CEPR. http://economics.huji.ac.il/facultye/zeira/machines7.pdf (Note: All hyperlinks were successfully assessed as of January 27th, 2011.) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 704 Annex 1 Source: Kurzweil (2005) Fifteen views of evolution: When plotted on a logarithmic graph, 15 separate lists of key events in human history show an exponential trend. Lists prepared by Carl Sagan, Paul D. Boyer, Encyclopedia Britannica, American Museum of Natural History and University of Arizona, compiled by Ray Kurzweil, amongst others. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 691-705 Pacini, H., Issues in the Path to the Singularity: A Critical View 705 Annex 2 Source: Wiki commons Graphical representation of the internet (left) compared to a biological neural network. Image credits: Opte project and Physics buzz. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 352-353 Hari, S. Commentary on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness 352 Commentary Commentary on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness Syamala Hari* ABSTRACT Nixon brings to our attention that consciousness changes and is of many kinds. Consciousness studies focus on only one kind of consciousness, ego consciousness also termed self-consciousness. Nixon's essay may cause some to re-think that issue. A brief summary of the concepts of God, divine Consciousness and human consciousness described in Indian philosophy is added here to dispel any misconceptions of this philosophy. Key Words: Panexperientialism, self consciousness. Is not consciousness the ability to experience? If there is unconscious experience, in other words, if consciousness is not required to experience, is that experience similar to the contents of a computer memory? (The author seems to think understanding the continuum of experience — from nonconscious to conscious, to self-transcending awareness is a first step to panexperientialism). If experience happens without consciousness does it happen vice versa, in other words can consciousness exist without any accompanying experience? Trying to answer these questions via self examination and self interrogation is tricky because the answers one gets from such self introspection are subjective and no two individuals get the same answer. The subjective nature of these investigations is probably the reason why philosophical papers on consciousness by different authors often contain the same words (such as consciousness, awareness, experience, and so on) but with different meanings and often not clearly defined but freely used as does this paper. The author seems to think consciousness, awareness, and experience are all different but it is not clear how consciousness and awareness differ according to him and it is not clear what self-transcending awareness is. I tried to understand unconscious experience using the computer-brain analogy. Nowadays, computers can perform many tasks which in earlier days, were supposed to require a high level of intelligence and education. Today's Artificial Intelligence (AI) programs can simulate several thought processes such as learning and problem solving. This is all possible because the human brain is in some ways, similar to a computer. Computer users frequently use expressions like "the computer knows", "it does not understand", "it thinks", and so on. In fact, when we say "the computer knows the object", we mean the following: A computer (behaves as if it) knows an object (a data item or a program instruction), when a representation of that object as bytes of "0"s and "1"s in a digital computer or qubits in a quantum computer, in other words, as a sequence of states of hardware units, exists in its memory. Once such a representation is entered into a computer's memory, it can perform any number of operations with that representation. The computer can compare the object with other objects also known to it similarly. It can add, subtract, compute functions of it, draw a picture of it, and so on. The computer can do almost anything that a person can do with that object and behave as though it "knows" the object without really knowing anything! On the other hand, a computer programmer knows the meaning of an algorithm in his/her head; the algorithm in the programmer’s head is not the same as its code stored in a computer (digital or quantum). The Correspondence: Syamala Hari E-mail: murty_hari@yahoo.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 352-353 Hari, S. Commentary on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness 353 programmer assigns meaning to the code; the computer does not. A living human brain is similar to a computer in the sense that it has a hardware-like physical component as well as a lot of information; but unlike the computer, the brain carries some “real information" (meaning, conscious or unconscious experience, desires, emotions, etc.). So it seems reasonable to expect that a human brain “knows” an object (physical or abstract), if and only if a physical representation of that object as well as some "real information" specific to the object both exist already in its memory. Hence it is possible that the human brain may sometimes contain some “real information” which has no associated physical representation (in terms of neural pathways etc.) and hence is not conscious of that piece of "real information". Such information could be unconscious experience. As to what the author calls “void consciousness of the mystics”, Consciousness in Indian philosophy, is referred to by the inanimate pronoun “it” to emphasize that it is nonphysical and so it has no gender. In ancient Indian philosophy (all written in Sanskrit) God is Consciousness which is different from human consciousness that we are currently trying to understand. Three essential qualities of God are mentioned in this literature: 1. Sat – means always and everywhere present 2. Chit – means conscious and alert 3. Ananda – means perfect bliss When they emphasize the second quality, God is Consciousness that is always present (hence never slumbering) unlike human consciousness which comes and goes. God is both personal and impersonal. God is impersonal because God is not flesh but spirit and therefore has no gender. God is personal in the sense that God is always conscious, blissful, loving and merciful and has free will. An elaborate explanation of the above three qualities implies that God or Consciousness is indepenent of space, time and causality. Free will means not to be conditioned or controlled by any cause, past, present, or future. That is why God was not born at some point of time from somebody but He/She/It exists always and everywhere and has no origin but is the origin of everything. Conciousness is said to be undescribable because to describe anything, we need a language which is a set of symbols and rules and therefore insufficient to describe something which is not bound by any rule. On the other hand, human consciousness is subject to causality. The state of a lifeless object usually depends on the past. The state of a human beings (and many other living beings) depends both on past and future because we have goals, purposes, desires, and so on (all these look into the future). References Nixon, G. M. (2010). From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness: The Continuum of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 1(3): 216-233. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 907 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part II) Article Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources Huping Hu* & Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT This paper summarizes experimental support to spin-mediated consciousness theory from various sources including the results of our own. In doing so, we also provide explanations based on this theory to experimental phenomena such as out-of-body experience and sensed presence, quantum-like cognitive functions and optical illusions. Whether one agrees or not with the spin-mediated consciousness theory is for one alone to judge. In any event, the importance of the experimental results mentioned in this paper is obvious: quantum effects play important roles in brain/cognitive functions despite of the denials and suspicions of the naysayer and skeptics. Key Words: spin-mediated consciousness, experimental support. 1. Introduction The spin-mediated consciousness theory as originally proposed (Hu & Wu, 2002) dealt with the immanent aspect of consciousness such as awareness. Within this framework, the nuclear/electronic spins are the mind-pixels which interact with the brain through quantum effects, modulating and being modulated by various classical brain activities such as the action potentials (Hu & Wu, 2002 & 2004a-d). We have previously discussed how action potentials modulate the dynamics of nuclear/electron spin networks inside the brain through J-coupling, dipolar coupling and chemical shielding tensors, thus, feeding information into mind in the dualistic approach (Hu & Wu, 2004 c & 2004d). Further, based on our own experimental findings and work done by others, we have also discussed on how mind might influence brain through proactive spin processes enabled by the varying high-voltage electric fields inside the brain (Hu & Wu, 2006a-d & 2007a-c). Also, since classical brain activities are largely electric and, in comparison, magnetic field insides the brain is only microscopically strong but fluctuating, we have also considered possible electric spin effect in the brain. This paper summarizes experimental support to spin-mediated consciousness theory from various sources including our own results. In doing so, we also provide explanations based on this theory to experimental phenomena such as out-of-body experience, sensed presence, quantum-like *Corresponding author: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D. Address: QuantumDream, Inc., P.O. Box 267, Stony Brook, NY 11790, USA. E-mail: hupinghu@quantumbrain.org ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 908 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources cognitive functions and optical illusions such as Rubin’s Vas. For more recent development in this theory and a mathematical treatment, please read Hu & Wu, 2009 & 2010 and the Appendix at the end of this paper. 2. The Work of Various Groups in Physics and Chemistry (a) Spin in quantum computation, quantum memory and quantum entanglement Theoretically, spin has been shown to be responsible for the quantum effects in both Hestenes (based on Clifford algebra, see, e.g. Hestenes, 1983) and Bohmian (based on quantum potential, see , e.g., Salesi & Recami, 1998) formulations quantum mechanics and more recently in the principle of existence proposed by the herein authors (Hu & Wu, 2009, 2010). Experimentally, quantum spins of nuclei, electrons and photons have now been successfully manipulated and entangled in various ways for the purposes of quantum computation, memory and communication (e.g., Matsukevich & Kuzmich, 2004; Chanelière, et al., 2005). By way of examples, nuclear spins have relatively long relaxation times after excitations (Gershenfeld & Chuang, 1997). Julsgaard et al (2001) achieved long-lived (~.05ms) entanglement of two macroscopic electron spin ensembles in room temperature. Khitrin et al, (2002) showed that a nematic liquid crystal is irradiated with multi-frequency pulse magnetic fields, its 1H spins can form long-lived intra-molecular quantum coherence with entanglement for information storage. The above facts suggest that the quantum entities inside the brains responsible for brain functions such as awareness are likely nuclear and/or electronic spins. Indeed, neural membranes and proteins contain vast numbers of nuclear spins such as 1H, 13C, 31P and 15N. These nuclear spins and unpaired electronic spins are the natural targets of interaction with action potentials in the brain through their motions and the photons of the magnetic pulses or other sources. These spins form complex intra- and inter-molecular networks through various intra-molecular J- and dipolar couplings and both short- and long-range intermolecular dipolar couplings. (b) Electric spin effects in spintronics Recent studies in spintronics have shown that an electric field will exert a transverse torque/force on a moving spin (see, e.g., Sun et al 2004; Shen, 2005). This is actually not hard to understand since according to special theory of relativity a moving spin in an electric field sees a magnetic field. Sun et al (2004) has shown that a moving spin is affected by an external electric field and feels a force/torque as m×[(v/c2)×E] where m and v are respectively the magnetic moment and the velocity of the moving spin and E is the external magnetic field. Shen (2005) has shown that, as a relativistic quantum mechanical effect, an external electric field exerts a transverse force on an electron spin 1/2 if the electron is moving. The said spin force, analogue to the Lorentz force on an electron charge in a magnetic field, is perpendicular to the electric field and the spin motion when the spin polarization is projected along the electric field (Id). Indeed, this effect has just been successfully used in the laboratory to flip the spin of an electron in a quantum dot by applying an oscillating electric field (Nowack, et al, 2007). The electric field ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 909 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources induces coherent transitions (Rabi oscillations) between spin-up and spin-down with 90° rotations as fast as ~55 ns and the analysis done by the authors indicates that the electrically-induced spin transitions are mediated by the spin-orbit interaction (Id). Therefore, the interactions between the moving nuclear/electronic spins in neural membranes and proteins and the varying high-voltage electric fields there directly feed information into mind in the dualistic mind-brain approach of spin mediated consciousness theory. To illustrate this particular mechanism, we now consider the spin transverse force exerted on a proton spin of a hydrogen atom connected to the carbon chain of a phosphate lipid located inside the neural membranes as shown in Figure 1. As the carbon chain rotates in parallel to the intense electric field E across the neural membranes, the vertical proton spin moving in a circle perpendicular to the carbon chain sees a magnetic field in the rotating frame of reference thus feels a transverse torque/force f toward the rotating plane. Quantitative calculations shall be performed in a separate paper. Fig.1. Illustration of spin transverse torque/force f exerted on a nuclear/electronic spin on a molecular chain or fragment inside the neural membranes and proteins. This spin transverse torque/force enables the neural spike trains to directly influence the nuclear/electronic spin networks in neural membranes and proteins thus inputting information into mind in the dualistic approach. (c) Dirac-Hestenes Electric Dipole It has been long known that in an external electric field, the Dirac particle such as an electron or nuclear sub-entity acts as if it has an imaginary electric moment i|d|=ieħ/2mc (Dirac, 1928). It was Hestenes who showed that Dirac magnetic and electric dipole moments have same origin associated with spin and magnetization (For a review, see, Hestenes, 2003). In Hestenes’ formulism, magnetic moment density is not directly proportional to the spin but “dually ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 910 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources proportional.” The duality factor eiβ has the effect of generating an effective electric dipole moment for the Dirac particle. Hestenes commented that “this seems to conflict with experimental evidence that the electron has no detectable electric moment, but the issue is subtle” (Id). Hestenes recently released two papers addressing this very same issue (Hestenes, 2008a & 2008b). He now proposes a zitterbewegung model which can either be regarded as a quasi-classical approximation that embodies structural features of the Dirac equation or treated as a formulation of fundamental properties of the electron that are manifested in the Dirac equation in some kind of average form. His suggested averaging over zitterbewegung as seen in the rest frame of the Dirac particle contains both a real magnetic dipole and real electric dipole (id). Hestenes further believes that this real electric dipole might already have experimental support (id). Other researchers have also shown recently that the magnetic and electric dipole moments of a fermion are closely related because they determine the real and imaginary part of the same physical quantity (Feng et al, 2001; Graesser & Thomas, 2002). Further, Silenko has recently shown in the Foldy-Wouthuysen representation that although the influence of the electric dipole moment on the Dirac particle motion is negligibly small in an external electric field, it influences significantly the spin motion of the said particle (Silenko, 2006). Furthermore, in the classical models of the Dirac particle, fast oscillating electric dipole moments also appear (Rivas, 2005; Gauthier 2006). These findings coincide with earlier finding that a moving magnetic dipole induces an electric dipole d=(v/c2)×m, where m and v are respectively the magnetic moment and the velocity of the moving spin, as a relativistic effect (Rosser, 1964). Rivas (2005) believes that what is lacking in the typical quantum mechanical wave equation is this oscillating electric dipole. He states that “in general, the average value of this term in an electric field of smooth variation is zero, [but] in high intensity fields or in intergranular areas in which the effective potentials are low, but their gradients could be very high, this average value should not be negligible.” Rivas further showed that the electric moment of the classical Dirac electron could lead to interesting physical effects (Id). In the context of spin-mediated consciousness theory the interactions between the Dirac-Hestenes electric dipoles of nuclei and/or electrons with the varying high-voltage electric fields inside the neural membranes and proteins may directly feed information carried by the neural spike trains into mind through the varying high-voltage action potentials. Even if the Dirac electric dipole is purely imaginary with no known physical consequence, we argue that in the dualistic mind-brain approach, it may serve as an information receiver in the non-local domain where mind resides for the simple reason that such non-local domain is likely amicable to a description by the imaginary numbers (See, e.g., Rauscher & Targ, 2001). Secondly, we have shown that electric dipole is intrinsically associated with a Dirac particle actually being a composite entity with the unmanifested negative energy side of the entity inseparably accompanying positive energy side of the entity. The unmanifested side of the entity is an active participant in the primordial self-referential spin processes driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness (See, Hu & Wu, 2003, 2004b, 2009 & 2010). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 911 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources 3. The Work of Michael Persinger’s Group (a) Sensed Presence & Out-of-Body Experience Persinger (1993, 2010a) is a pioneer in this field and have done ground-breaking experimental work over the years. In a recent article he and his colleague(s) summarize their results as follows (Michael, 2010a): Quantitative EEG data indicate that a sequence of stimulation by between 1 and 5 uT fields at the scalp’s surface with as little as 10% greater intensity over the right hemisphere compared to the left is associated with greater convergence of theta activity between the left temporal and right prefrontal region. Subsequent bilateral stimulation is associated with greater right-to-left temporal coherence. These two experimental conditions and quantitative EEG patterns are associated with reports of out-of-body experiences and the sensed presence, respectively. … The results and approaches of our research and those of Olaf Blanke both show that out-of-body-experiences and the sensed presence can be generated experimentally by stimulating either one or the other of the hemispheres within specific regions. The quality of the experiences, although direct comparisons have not been made, appears to be similar and the quantitative or meaningful intensity reveal similar values for individual salience. … [We] reviewed and re-analyzed the approximately 20 experiments involving 407 subjects that have demonstrated the experimental elicitation of either the sensed presence or out of body experience. [Our] re-analyses clearly showed the specific magnetic configurations and not the subjects’ exotic beliefs or suggestibility was responsible for the increased incidence of sensed presences. The subjects’ histories of spontaneous sensed presences before the experiment (and exposure to the magnetic fields) were moderately correlated with exotic beliefs and temporal lobe sensitivity. The side attributed to the presence at the time of the experience was affected by the parameters of the fields, the hemisphere to which they were maximized, and the person’s a priori beliefs. In vivid terms one test subject in Persinger’s experiment reported “I felt a presence behind me and then along the left side. When I tried to focus on the position, the presence moved. Every time I tried to sense where it was, it moved around. When it moved to the right side, I experienced a deep sense of security like I have not experienced before. I started to cry when I felt it slowly fade away ([Persinger] had changed the field patterns)”. Also in vivid terms, another test subject reported an out-of-body experience stating “I feel as if there was a bright white light in front of me. I saw a black spot that became a funnel....no tunnel that I felt drawn into. I felt moving, like spinning forward through it. I began to feel the presence of people, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 912 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources but I could not see them. They were along my sides. They were colourless and grey looking. I know I was in the chamber but it was very real. I suddenly felt intense fear and felt ice cold.” Persinger and colleague (2010a) reasoned that: Our primary assumption is that consciousness and its variants of mystical states can be expressed as quantum phenomena. If consciousness and thought are coupled to electron movements, then a macroscopic manifestation should be congruent with the magnetic field strengths associated with neurocognitive activities. Access to the information within the movements of an electron, its fundamental charge, and the photon emissions associated with changes in electron movements, would allow mystical states and the information with which they are associated to have alternative interpretations that recruit the fundamental properties of space-time and matter. Persinger et. al.’s above experimental results provide strong experimental proof of the spin-mediated consciousness theory for the reasons stated below: First, the primary targets of interactions for the weak pulsed magnetic field used by Persinger’s Group are the nuclear and/or electron spins associated with the neural membranes, protein and water etc. Indeed, neural membranes and proteins contain vast numbers of nuclear spins such as 1 H, 13C, 31P and 15N. Second, as we have experimentally demonstrated (Hu & Wu, 2006a-c), pulsed electromagnetic fields (photons) carries information through quantum entanglement from external substance (and environment) which they interacted with. Third, nuclear spins in the brain form complex intra- and inter-molecular networks through various intra-molecular J- and dipolar couplings and both short- and long-range intermolecular dipolar couplings. Further, nuclear spins have relatively long relaxation times after excitations (Gershenfeld & Chuang, 1997). Fourth, quantum spin is a fundamental quantum process with intrinsic connection to the structure of space-time (Dirac, 1928) and was shown to be responsible for the quantum effects in both Hestenes and Bohmian quantum mechanics (Hestenes, 1983; Salesi & Recami, 1998). Therefore, altered states of consciousness such as sensed presence and out-of-body experience whether they are produced by magnetic, electric or other stimulations or circumstances can be most effectively explained as the changes of the relative contents and/or intensities of the test subjects’ neural quantum entanglement with their surroundings etc. (including possibly spiritual environments/information!). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 913 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources (b) Apparent Non-local EEG Correlations under Weak Pulsed Magnetic Field In 2003, Persinger’s group demonstrated that the power within a specific band of theta activity in one person was enhanced while another receives circumcerebral pulsed magnetic field involving siblings which they suggested as a possible mechanism for cognitive influence at a distance (Persinger et al, 2003, also see Persinger & Lavallee, 2010b for a summary of this and their later work): In the experiment with siblings, one wore the eight-solenoid device while sitting in a closed acoustic chamber (which was also a Faraday Cage) while the other sibling’s EEG was recorded from eight locations over the left and right frontal, temporal, parietal, and occipital lobes. The latter sibling or response person sat blindfolded in the dark in other rooms either 5 m or 10 m away. A 20 sec baseline of the quantitative EEG (QEEG) activity was recorded and stored. During each of the 6 different serially presented 5 min configurations of rotating (circumcerebral) magnetic field presentations to the “stimulus” person in the chamber 20 sec of QEEG measurements were recorded for the response person. During the recording period the stimulus person in the chamber was asked to imagine being in the other room with their sibling and touching him or her. The results were clear. When the 20+2 ms presentations occurred the response person’s EEG showed increased power within the theta range, particularly 5 Hz to 5.9 Hz but only if the stimulus person was imagining being near the response person. The greatest increase occurred over the (right) parietal lobe. Many of the response persons reported a sensed presence along their left sides at this time as well. The effect did not occur when there was no magnetic field being generated around the head of the stimulus person and much less so during other configurations. More experiments were designed and carried out more recently (see, Persinger & Lavallee, 2010b): 8 students (for four pairs) were randomly selected from the class roster of about 80 students …Each pair was instructed to meet twice per week for one hour for four consecutive weeks…to establish a history of proximity without either genetic or familial factors… On the day of the experiment pairs were exposed to the same procedures as those subjects in the sibling study. When the stimulus person in the chamber was wearing the equipment that generated the circumcerebral magnetic fields with 20+2 configurations and imagining being in the room with the response person, his or her EEG displayed increased power within the theta range….When the stimulus person during the 20+2 field presentations was simply thinking about the other (response) person, he or she showed a marked increase in the feeling of a sensed presence, anger, and sexual arousal. Such experiences did not occur for the stimulus persons. Pairs of random strangers, obtained by recruiting people walking by the laboratory and who were exposed to the same procedures did not display significant changes in either their EEG profile or their subjective experiences. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 914 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources In a third variation, Persinger’s group (see, Persinger & Lavallee, 2010b) tested the concept of macroscopic entanglement by simultaneously measuring the quantitative EEG of pairs of people separated by about 75 m: They found that about 50% of the variance of the simultaneous EEG power was shared between the pairs of brains. Considering the measurements by Mulligan et al (2010) that showed significant correlations between power within the theta and gamma bands over the right prefrontal regions and daily geomagnetic activity, such “excessive” correlations would be expected. Both members of the pairs would have been exposed to similar geomagnetic activity. This third factor would have produced the apparent coherence or “excess correlations”. The critical observation for this study was the direction of the correlations. Pairs of strangers showed positive correlations in power output within the alpha and gamma bands over the frontal and temporal lobes. This would be expected if a third recondite (to the observers) factor produced both. However, people who shared a reinforcement history (that previously shared locations) displayed negative correlations in power within the alpha and theta band over these regions. This could be considered an analogue of quantum phenomena when the state of one particle is opposite to the one with which it is entangled. Direct measurements with a fluxgate magnetometer of the static geomagnetic field intensities within both locations where the EEG measurements were taken were unusually similar, as if they were “the same” space. Another variation was also carried out by Persinger’s group (see, Persinger & Lavallee, 2010b): To create spatial identities we employed two, eight circular solenoid systems separated by 15 m. One person sat within the acoustic chamber and wore one unit while a second person sat blind-folded in the dark in a separate room wearing the second unit. The two units were synchronized by being connected to the same computer that generated the complex, altering-velocity rotating magnetic fields to both brains simultaneously....While both the stimulus person and the response person were exposed to the same complex configurational magnetic field the stimulus person was exposed to flashes of white light of about 1 lux for 30 s intervals. The flash frequency was between 4 and 15 Hz. At the same time the QEEG for the response person was measured for 20 s just before and 20 s during the light flashes were presented to the stimulus person. In several experiments involving three different sets of experimenters employing the same paradigm, the response subjects’ power profiles from QEEG analyses showed increases within the right parietal-temporal region only when the stimulus person was watching the light flashes. In yet another experiment, Persinger’s group (see, Persinger & Lavallee, 2010b) “measured the energy of photon emissions from the response person while the stimulus person was exposed to the flashing lights: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 915 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources In this situation the stimulus person sat within the closed acoustic chamber while the response person sat blindfolded 10 m away in a closed, dark room. Instead of measuring EEG activity, a photomultiplier tube (PMT) was placed 15 cm away form the right hemisphere on the same plane as the temporal lobe….The measurements were also consistent with the hypothesis by Bokkon (2005) and his colleagues that biophotons are not only routinely emitted from neuronal processes such as action potentials, but may be an energetic field that actually is the visual experience associated with visual perception and dreaming. … Analyses of the data indicated that when the stimulus person was watching the diffuse light flashes there was a net increase of about 10-11 W/m2 from the response person’s right hemisphere….Three pairs of stimulus-response persons were tested and all three response persons displayed this effect. One of them reported perceiving “white light” in the visual field, even though the subject was sitting in the dark and blind folded, during 5 of the 6 intervals the stimulus person was watching the light flash. Obviously, the person was not told when the light would be presented to the stimulus person. Persinger (see, Persinger & Lavallee, 2010b) reasoned that “although interesting the apparent support for macroentanglement did not meet the qualitative criteria or the essential procedural operations of what Bohr and Schrödinger had envisioned. Entanglement involves a process by which two particles (or by inference an aggregate of particles that behave as a single particle) respond simultaneously to a change in each others states despite the distance between them at anytime after their diminished close proximity. In other words the two distal particles are still responding as if they occupy the same space or may even be the same particle with the potential for two different states.” Again, Persinger et. al.’s above experimental results provide strong experimental proof of the spin-mediated consciousness theory for the reasons stated above and somewhat repeated below: First, the primary targets of interactions for the weak pulsed magnetic field used by Persinger’s Group are the nuclear and/or electron spins associated with the neural membranes, protein and water etc. Indeed, neural membranes and proteins contain vast numbers of nuclear spins such as 1 H, 13C, 31P and 15N. Second, we have experimentally demonstrated (Hu & Wu, 2006d, 2007a) non-local physical, chemical and gravitational effects in a first physical system (water) when a second one (water) quantum-entangled with the first one was manipulated. Therefore, the apparent non-local EEG correlations obtained by Persinger’s group with weak pulsed magnetic field can be most effectively explained as caused by non-local effect through quantum entanglement mediated by nuclear/electron spins in the brain. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 916 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources 4. The Work of Elio Conte & His Colleagues In 2003, Conte et. al. found preliminary evidence of quantum-like behavior in measurements of mental states which were represented by Hilbert space vectors. For comparison, see Aerts, et al. (2000). According to Conte (2003): Such a representation induces huge reduction of information about a mental state....Our quantum-like approach describes statistics of measurements of cognitive systems with the aim to ascertain if cognitive systems behave as quantum-like systems where here quantum-like cognitive behavior means that cognitive systems result to be very sensitive to changes of the context with regard to the complex of the mental conditions. In 2009, Conte et. al. Also found that mental states follow quantum mechanics during perception and cognition of ambiguous figures. For comparison, see Manousakis (2007). Again, according to Conte et.al. (2009): Processes undergoing quantum mechanics, exhibit quantum interference effects. In this case quantum probabilities result to be different from classical probabilities because they contain an additional main point that in fact is called the quantum interference term. We use ambiguous figures to analyse if during perception cognition of human subjects we have violation of the classical probability field and quantum interference. The experiments, conducted on a group of 256 subjects, evidence that we have such quantum effect. Therefore, mental states, during perception cognition of ambiguous figures, follow quantum mechanics. In 2010, Conte has presented a new synthesis of quantum-like cognitive functions based on his theoretical work on Clifford algebra formulation of quantum mechanics and experimental work on quantum-like entanglement and interference in human cognition (Conte et. al., 2010). Conte has detailed and elaborated on how “we think in a quantum probabilistic manner.” Here he has first reformulated Aerts’ work on possible violations of Bell’s inequality in concept combinations. Then Conte discussed and formulated with Clifford algebra the notion and properties of self in line with Jung’s work on the subject. Conte and his colleagues have designed and carried out important experiments in an attempt to verify if Jung’s theory has a possible quantum formulation (Conte et. al., 2010). Remarkably, their results seem to confirm this. As Conte put it, “[i]n particular, psychological functions and attitudes seem to realize in a large percentage of cases quantum entanglement.” Through out the text, Conte lists five pieces of evidence including several experiments did by him and his colleagues to show that quantum mechanics is directly involved in the dynamics of the mental states. With respect to spin-mediated consciousness theory, although the elements in Conte's Clifford algebra formulation are abstract entities which are fundamentally important in his work, these elements are usually expressed as Pauli matrices associated with spin in standard quantum mechanics. Thus, since matter is, according to Conte, interfaced with cognitive feature, it is possible that this interface is accomplished by the important role of spin at the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 917 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources neuro-physiological level. Therefore, Conte et. al.’s important experiments demonstrating quantum-like behavoris in human cognition have natural explanations based the spin-mediated consciousness theory at the neuro-physiological level. 5. Optical Illusions The optical illusion occurs when a person is viewing an ambigous figure such as the Rubin’s vase (see Figure 2). At any one instant the figure can be perceived in one way or the other but not both, that is, what is perceived flips between two things. Manousakis (2007) recently suggested that conscious awareness of the ambigous figure could be based on certain quantum effect in the brain. Figure 2 (Source: Wikipedia) Manousakis (2007) theorized that conscious awareness is generated anew each time the person flips an ambiguous figure which is represented in the brain as a quantum superposition of two distinctive quantum states by collapsing the superpositioned state into one thing or the other. Manousakis (2007) conducted experiments in which test subjects had their brain activity measured with EEG and MRI imaging while looking at ambiguous figures. He then calculated the firing rates of neurons before, during, and after the test subjects flipped the images the patterns of which he claimed to be characteristic of the quantum effects that underly conscious awareness. Many researchers dispute Manousakis’ claims and offer alternative classical interpretations. We agree with Manousakis that the flipping of ambiguous figure by the test subject is a quantum effect. Indeed, the work of Conte et. al. (2009) discussed above also support this suggestion. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 918 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources With respect to spin-mediated consciousness theory, it provides the simplest, most natural and most plausible base in that the macroscopic quantum superposition in the brain is formed by the collective spin state of nuclear and/or electron spins in the brain. 6. Our Own Experimental Work (a) Non-local Effects in the Brain Caused by External Chemical Substances It is commonly believed that quantum entanglement alone cannot be used to transmit classical information, although quantum entanglement is ubiquitous in the microscopic world and manifests itself macroscopically under some circumstances (Julsgaard et al., 2001 & 2004; Ghosh et al., 2003). In order to test the spin mediated consciousness theory we just went ahead with experiments instead of armchair debate by first attempting to entangle the electronic/nuclear spins inside the brain with those of a chemical substance such as a general anesthetic and then observing the resulting brain effects such attempt may produce, if any (Hu & Wu, 2006b & 2006c). Here we summarize our experimental results. We found that applying magnetic pulses to the brain when a general anesthetic sample was placed in between caused the brain to feel the effect of said anesthetic for several hours after the treatment as if the test subject had actually inhaled the same (Hu & Wu, 2006b & 2006c). We then verified that the said brain effect is indeed the consequence of quantum entanglement between quantum entities inside the brain and those of the chemical substance under study induced by the photons of the magnetic pulses or applied lights (id). We suggest that the said quantum entities inside the brain are nuclear or electronic spins (id). A typical setup for one set of experiments was comprised of a magnetic coil with an estimated 20W output placed at one inch above the right side of a test subject’s forehead, a small flat glass-container inserted between the magnetic coil and the forehead, and an audio system with adjustable power output and frequency spectrum controls connected to the magnetic coil. When music is played on the audio system, the said magnetic coil produces magnetic pulses with frequencies in the range of 5Hz to10kHz. Experiments were conducted with said container being filled with different general anesthetics, medications, or nothing/water as control, and the test subject being exposed to the magnetic pulses for 10min and not being told the content in the container or details of the experiments. The indicators used to measure the brain effect of said treatment were the first-person experiences of any unusual sensations such as numbness, drowsiness and/or euphoria which the subject felt after the treatment and the relative degrees of these unusual sensations on a scale of 10 with 0=nothing, 1=weak, 2=light moderate, 3=moderate, 4=light strong, 5=strong, 6=heavily strong, 7=very strong, 8=intensely strong, 9=extremely strong and 10=intolerable. The durations of the unusual sensations and other symptoms after the treatment such as nausea or headache were also recorded. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 919 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources A typical setup for a second set of experiments was comprised of the magnetic coil connected to the audio system, a large flat glass-container filled with 200ml fresh tap water and the small flat glass-container inserted between the magnetic coil and larger glass-container. Figure 3 shows a typical setup for the second set of experiments when a red laser with a 50mW output and wavelengths of 635nm – 675nm was used. All Experiments were conducted in the dark with the small flat glass-container being filled with different general anesthetics, medications, or nothing/water as control, the large glass-container being filled with 200ml fresh tap water and exposed to the magnetic pulses or laser light for 30min and the test subject consuming the treated tap water but not being told the content in the small container or details of the experiments. The indicators used for measuring the brain effects were the same as those used in the first set of experiments. Experiments were also carried out respectively with a 1200W microwave oven and a flashlight powered by two size-D batteries. When the microwave oven was used, a glass tube containing 20ml fresh tap water was submerged into a larger glass tube containing 50ml general anesthetic and exposed to microwave radiation for 5sec. The said procedure was repeated for multiple times to collect a total of 200ml treated tap water for consumption. When the flashlight was used, the magnetic coil shown in Figure 2 was replaced with the flashlight. To verify that the brain effects experienced by the test subjects were the consequences of quantum entanglement between quantum entities inside the brain and those in the chemical substances under study, the following additional experiments were carried out: In the first set of entanglement verification experiments, the laser light from the red laser first passed through the large glass-container with 200ml fresh tap water and then through the small flat glass-container filled with a chemical substance or nothing/water as control located about 300cm away. After 30min of exposure to the laser light, a test subject consumed the exposed tap water without being told the content in the small container or details of the experiments and reported the brain effects felt for the next several hours. In the second set of entanglement verification experiments, 400ml fresh tap water in a glass-container was first exposed to the radiation of the magnetic coil for 30min or that of the 1500W microwave oven for 2min. Then the test subject immediately consumed one-half of the water so exposed. After 30min from the time of consumption the other half was exposed to magnetic pulses or laser light for 30 minutes using the setup shown in Figure 2 and Figure 4 respectively. The test subject reported, without being told the content in the small container or details of the experiments, the brain effects felt for the whole period from the time of consumption to several hours after the exposure had stopped. In the third set of entanglement verification experiments, one-half of 400ml Poland Spring water with a shelve time of at least three months was immediately consumed by the test subject. After 30min from the time of consumption the other half was exposed to the magnetic pulses or laser light for 30min using the setup shown in Figure 2 and Figure 4 respectively. Test subject reported, without being told the content in the small container or details of the experiments, the brain effects felt for the whole period from the time of consumption to several hours after the exposure had stopped. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 920 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources In the fourth set of entanglement verification experiments, the test subject would take one-half of the 400ml fresh tap water exposed to microwave for 2min or magnetic pulses for 30min to his/her workplace located more than 50 miles away (in one case to Beijing located more than 6,500 miles away) and consumed the same at the workplace at a specified time. After 30min from the time of consumption, the other half was exposed to magnetic pulses or laser light for 30min at the original location using the setup shown in Figure 2 and Figure 4 respectively. The test subject reported the brain effects felt without being told the content in the small container or details of the experiments for the whole period from the time of consumption to several hours after the exposure had stopped. In the control studies for the first set of experiments, all test subjects did not feel anything unusual from the exposure to magnetic pulses except vague or weak local sensation near the site of exposure. In contrast, all general anesthetics studied produced clear and completely reproducible brain effects in various degrees and durations as if the test subjects had actually inhaled the same. These brain effects were first localized near the site of treatment and then spread over the whole brain and faded away within several hours. But residual brain effects (hangover) lingered on for more than 12 hours in most cases. Among the general anesthetics studied, chloroform and deuterated chloroform (chloroform D) produced the most pronounced and potent brain effects in strength and duration followed by isoflorance and diethyl ether. While the test subjects did not feel anything unusual from consuming the tab water treated in the control experiments with magnetic pulses or laser light, all the general anesthetics studied produced clear and completely reproducible brain effects in various degrees and durations respectively similar to the observations in the first set of experiments. These effects were over the whole brain, intensified within the first half hour after the test subjects consumed the treated water and then faded away within the next a few hours. But residual brain effects lingered on for more than 12 hours as in the first set of experiments. Among the general anesthetics studied, again chloroform and deuterated chloroform produced the most pronounced and potent effect in strength and duration followed by isoflorance and diethyl ether. Comparative experiments were also conducted on the authors themselves with chloroform and diethyl ether by asking them to inhale the vapors of chloroform and diethyl respectively for 5sec and compare the brain effect felt with those in the two sets of experiments described above. The brain effects induced in these comparative experiments were qualitatively similar to those produced in various experiments described above when chloroform and diethyl ether were respectively used for the exposure to photons of various sources. With respect to the entanglement verification experiments, clear and consistently reproducible brain effects were experienced by the test subjects above and beyond what were noticeable in the control portions of the experiments under blind settings. With respect to the second, third and fourth sets of entanglement verification experiments, the only possible explanation for the brain effects experienced by the test subjects are that they were the consequences of quantum entanglement because the water consumed by the test subjects was never directly exposed to the magnetic pulses or the laser lights in the presence of the chemical substances. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 921 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources More specifically, in the first set of entanglement verification experiments, the brain effects experienced by the test subjects were the same as those in which the setup shown in Figure 3 was used. In the second, third and fourth sets of these experiments, all test subjects did not feel anything unusual in the first half hour after consuming the first half of the water either exposed to microwave/magnetic pulses or just sit on the shelf for more than 3 months. But within minutes after the second half of the same water was exposed to the laser light or magnetic pulses in the presence of general anesthetics, the test subjects would experience clear and completely reproducible brain effect of various intensities as if they have actually inhaled the general anesthetic used in the exposure of the second half of the water. The said brain effects were over the whole brain, first intensified within minutes after the exposure began and persisted for the duration of the said exposure and for the next several hours after the exposure had stopped. Further, all other conditions being the same, magnetic coil produced more intense brain effects than the red laser. Furthermore, all other conditions being the same, the water exposed to microwave or magnetic pulses before consumption produced more intense brain effects than water just sitting on the shelve for more than 3 months before consumption. There are other indications that quantum entanglement was the cause of the brain effects experienced by the test subjects. For example, the said inducing mean did not depend on the wavelengths of the photons generated. Thus, mere interactions among the photons, a chemical substance and water will induce brain effects after a test subject consumes the water so interacted. In light of the results from the entanglement verification experiments, we conclude that the brain effects experienced by the test subjects were the consequences of quantum entanglement between quantum entities inside the brains and those of the chemical substances under study induced by the entangling photons of the magnetic pulses or applied lights. More specifically, the results obtained in the first set of experiments can be interpreted as the consequence of quantum entanglement between the quantum entities in the brain and those in the chemical substances induced by the photons of the magnetic pulses. Similarly, the results obtained from the second sets of experiments can be explained as quantum entanglement between the quantum entities in the chemical substance and those in the water induced by the photons of the magnetic pulses, laser light, microwave or flashlight and the subsequent physical transport of the water entangled with the said chemical substance to the brain after consumption by the test subject which, in turn, produced the observed brain effects through the entanglement of the quantum entities inside the brain with those in the consumed water. We would like to point out that although the indicators used to measure the brain effects were qualitative and subjective, they reflect the first-person experiences of the qualities, intensities and durations of these effects by the test subjects since their brains were directly used as experimental probes. Further, these effects are completely reproducible under blind experimental settings so that possible placebo effects were excluded. However, as with many other important new results, replications by others are the key to independently confirm our results reported here. Our experiments may appear simple and even “primitive” but the results and implications are profound. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 922 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources We first chose general anesthetics in our experiments because they are among the most powerful brain-influencing substances. Our expectation was that, if nuclear and/or electronic spins inside the brain are involved in brain functions such as perception as recently hypothesized by us (Hu & Wu, 2002), the brain may be able to sense the effect of an external anesthetic sample through quantum entanglement between these spins inside the brain and those of the said anesthetic sample induced by the photons of the magnetic pulses by first interacting with the nuclear and/or electronic spins inside the said anesthetic sample, thus carrying quantum information about the anesthetic molecules, and then interacting with the nuclear and/or electronic spins inside the brain. We suggest here that the said quantum entities inside the brains are likely nuclear and/or electronic spins for the reasons discussed below. Neural membranes and proteins contain vast numbers of nuclear spins such as 1H, 13C, 31P and 15N. These nuclear spins and unpaired electronic spins are the natural targets of interaction with the photons of the magnetic pulses or other sources. These spins form complex intra- and inter-molecular networks through various intra-molecular J- and dipolar couplings and both short- and long-range intermolecular dipolar couplings. Further, nuclear spins have relatively long relaxation times after excitations (Gershenfeld & Chuang, 1997). Thus, when a nematic liquid crystal is irradiated with multi-frequency pulse magnetic fields, its 1H spins can form long-lived intra-molecular quantum coherence with entanglement for information storage (Khitrin et al, 2002). Long-lived (~ .05 ms) entanglement of two macroscopic electron spin ensembles in room temperature has also been achieved (Julsgaard et al., 2001). Furthermore, spin is a fundamental quantum process with intrinsic connection to the structure of space-time (Dirac, 1928) and was shown to be responsible for the quantum effects in both Hestenes and Bohmian quantum mechanics (Hestenes, 1983; Salesi & Recami, 1998). Thus, we have recently suggested that these spins could be involved in brain functions at a more fundamental level (Hu & Wu, 2002). Several important conclusions and implications can be drawn from our findings. First, biologically/chemically meaningful information can be transmitted through quantum entanglement from one place to another by photons and possibly other quantum objects such as electrons, atoms and even molecules. Second, both classical and quantum information can be transmitted between locations of arbitrary distances through quantum entanglement alone. Third, instantaneous signaling is physically real which implies that Einstein's theory of relativity is in real (not just superficial) conflict with quantum theory. Fourth, brain processes such as perception and other biological processes likely involve quantum information and nuclear and/or electronic spins may play important roles in these processes. Further, our findings provide important new insights into the essence and implications of the mysterious quantum entanglement and clues for solving the long-standing measurement problem in quantum theory including the roles of the observer and/or consciousness. Very importantly, our findings also provide a unified scientific framework for explaining many paranormal and/or anomalous effects such as telepathy, telekinesis and homeopathy, if they do indeed exist, thus transforming these paranormal and/or anomalous effects into the domains of conventional sciences. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 923 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources In the context of mind-brain interaction, our above findings imply that the mind, if it is or behave like a quantum entity as in our spin-mediated consciousness theory, may affect the brain through quantum- entanglement mediated non-local processes in defiance of the second law of thermodynamics. Though the details of such interaction still needed to be worked out in future studies, we here give a hypothetical example of how it might be like. (b) Non-local Effect in Simple Physical Systems Many if not most scientists do not believe that quantum effects or quantum information plays any role in consciousness (see, e.g., Tegmark, 2000). Thus, to gain credibility and make real progress any serious attempt at a quantum brain theory should start with a theoretically plausible hypothesis and then move to experimental work. Scientific methods dictate that a hypothesis should only achieve legitimacy if it is experimentally verified. Scientific methods also require that one conform one’s knowledge of nature to repeatable observations. Thus, it is unscientific to reject what’s observed repeatedly and consistently. In the experiments summarized herein, we measured the changes of physical and/or chemical parameters in simple quantum-entangled systems. We found that the pH value and temperature of water in a detecting reservoir quantum-entangled with water in a remote reservoir can change against local environment when the latter is manipulated under the condition that the water in the detecting reservoir is able to exchange energy with its local environment (id). We also found that the gravity of water in a detecting reservoir quantum-entangled with water in a remote reservoir can change against local gravity when the latter was remotely manipulated (Hu & Wu, 2006d & 2007a). The physical/chemical observables measured in the experiments were pH value, temperature and gravity measured with high-precision instruments. The successes of the experiments described herein were achieved with the aids of high-precision analytical instruments. Quantum-entangled stock water in individual volumes of 500ml or similar quantities was prepared as described previously (Hu & Wu, 2006b&c) which might then be split into smaller volumes or combined into larger ones based on needs. The key experimental setup included (1) the analytical balance calibrated internally and stabilized in the underground room for more than one week before use and a tightly closed plastic first-reservoir containing 175ml water split from the 500ml stock water which is placed on the wind-shielded pan of the balance with 1-inch white foam in between as insulation; (2) the digital thermometer and calibrated pH meter placed into the middle of a glass second-reservoir containing 75ml water split from the 500ml stock water which is closed to prevent air exchange; and (3) the 25-litre Dewar containing 15-25 litres of liquid nitrogen which is located at a distant of 50 feet from the underground room and a tightly closed plastic third-reservoir containing 250ml water split from the 500ml stock water to be submerged into the liquid nitrogen in the Dewar at a specified time. Experiments with this key setup were carried out as follows: (1) prepare the 500ml quantum-entangled stock water, divide the same into 175ml, 75ml and 250ml portions and put them into their respective reservoirs described above; (2) set up the experiment and let the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 924 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources instruments to stabilize for 30min before any measurements is taken; (3) record for 20min minute-by-minute changes of pH value and temperature of the water in the first-reservoir and weight of the second-reservoir with water before submerging the third reservoir into liquid nitrogen; (4) submerge the third-reservoir with water into liquid nitrogen for 15min or another desired length of time and record the instrument readings as before; and (5) take the third-reservoir out of liquid nitrogen, thaw the same in warm water for 30min or longer and, at the same time, record the instrument readings as before. Control experiments were carried out in same steps with nothing done to the water in the third-reservoir. In one variation of the above setup, the closed plastic third-reservoir was replaced with a metal container and instead of freeze-thaw treatment the water in the metal container was quickly heated to boiling within 4-5 minutes and then cooled in cold water. In a second variation of the above setup, the gravity portion of the experiment was eliminated and the water in the first and second reservoirs was combined into a closed thermal flask which prevents heat exchange between the water being measured and its local environment. In a third variation of the above setup, the gravity portion of the experiment was eliminated and the water in the first and second reservoirs was combined into a fourth plastic container in which 5ml concentrated HCl (38% by weight) was first added, then 20g NaOH powder was added and next the same water was transferred to a metal container and heated to boiling on a stove. In a fourth variation of the above first-setup, the 25-litre Dewar containing liquid nitrogen was replaced by a large water tank located 20-feet above the underground room which contained 200-gallon tap water sitting in room temperature for months and, instead of submersion, the water in the third-reservoir was poured into the large water tank the purpose of which was to quantum-entangle the poured water with the water in the large tank. In a fifth variation of the above setup, the gravity portion of the experiment was eliminated and the water in the first and second reservoirs was combined into a closed glass fourth-reservoir which was moved to a location more than 50 miles away from the Dewar for temperature measurement. The measured pH value of the water in the second-reservoir changed during the three stages of manipulations of the water in the remote third-reservoir as follows. Within minutes after the remote third-reservoir was submerged into liquid nitrogen, during which the temperature of water being manipulated would drop from about 25ºC to -193 ºC, the pH value of the water in the second reservoir steadily stopped dropping and then started rising, but about 20min after the frozen water was taken out of liquid nitrogen and thawed in warm water the pH value of the same steadily leveled off and started dropping again. In contrast, the control experiments did not show such dynamics. It is known that the pH value of water increases as its temperature goes down to 0ºC. Therefore, the pH value of water being measured goes in the same direction as the remote water when the latter is manipulated. The difference in pH values from control in which no freeze-thaw was done at the point of thawing is about 0.010. However, if the water being measured is kept in a thermal flask to prevent heat exchange with the local environment, no effect on pH value was observed under freeze-thaw treatment of the remote water. Statistical analysis performed on data collected after freezing for 10min show that the results are significantly different under these different treatments/settings. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 925 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources The measured temperature of the water in the second-reservoir changed during the three stages of manipulations of the water in the remote third-reservoir as follows. Before the submersion of the remote third-reservoir into liquid nitrogen the temperature of the water in the second-reservoir rose in small increments due to, by design, the slight temperature difference between the local environment and the water inside the second reservoir; but within about 4-5 minutes after the remote third-reservoir was submerged into liquid nitrogen, during which the temperature of water being manipulated would drop from about 25ºC to -193 ºC, the temperature of the water in the second reservoir first stopped rising and then steadily dropped in small increments; and then within about 4-5 minutes after the frozen water was taken out of liquid nitrogen and thawed in warm water the temperature of the same first stopped dropping and then steadily rose again in small increments. In contrast, the control experiments did not show such dynamics. The temperature difference from control in which no freeze-thaw was done at the point of thawing is about 0.05oC. However, if the water being measured is kept in a thermal flask to prevent heat exchange with the local environment, no dropping of temperature were observed under freeze-thaw treatment of the remote water. Statistical analysis performed on data collected after freezing for 10min show that the results are significantly different under these different treatments/settings. The measured weight of the first-reservation changed during the three stages of manipulation of the water in the remote third-reservoir as follows. Before the submersion of the remote third-reservoir into liquid nitrogen the weight being measured drifted lower very slowly. But almost immediately after the remote third-reservoir was submerged into liquid nitrogen, during which the temperature and physical properties of water being manipulated drastically changed, the weight of the first-reservoir dropped at an increased rate, and after the frozen water was taken out the liquid nitrogen and thawed in warm water the weight of the same first stopped dropping and, in some cases, even rose before resuming drifting lower as further discussed below. In contrast, the control experiments did not show such dynamics. The weight difference from control in which no freeze-thaw was done at the point of thawing is about 2.5mg. Statistical analysis performed on data collected after freezing for 10min show that the results are significantly different under these different treatments/settings. In some cases, the weight of the water being measured not only stopped dropping for several minutes but also rose. The signatures of freezing induced weight decreases and thawing induced weight increases for three different thawing times are very clear. With all experimental setups and their variations described herein, we have observed clear and reproducible non-local effects with the aids of high-precision analytical instruments and under well-controlled conditions. The physical observables used for measuring the non-local effects are simple ones which can be measured with high precisions. These effects are, even under the most stringent statistical analysis, significantly above and beyond what were noticeable in the control experiments. We chose to use liquid nitrogen in a large Dewar placed at a distant location for manipulating water in our experiments because it can provide drastic changes in temperature and properties of water in a very short period of time. Our expectation was that, if the quantum entities inside the water being measured are able to sense the changes experienced by the quantum entities in the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 926 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources water being manipulated through quantum entanglement and further utilize the information associated with the said changes, the chemical, thermal and gravitational properties of the water might be affected through quantum entanglement mediated non-local processes (Hu & Wu, 2006a, b & c). The most logical explanation for these observed non-local effects is that they are the consequences of non-local processes mediated by quantum entanglement between quantum entities in the water being measured and the remote water being manipulated as more specifically illustrated below. First, when pH value of the water in the manipulation reservoir is high or low or is changing under direct manipulation such as extreme cooling or heating or addition of acidic or alkaline chemical, the measured pH in the detecting reservoir shifts in the same direction under the non-local influence of the water in the manipulation reservoir mediated through quantum entanglement and, under the condition that the detecting reserve is able to exchange energy with its local environment, as if H+ in the latter is directly available to water in the detecting reservoir. Second, when the temperature in the manipulation reservoir is extremely low or high or is changing under direct manipulation such as extreme cooling or heating or addition of heat-generating and/or property-changing chemical such as concentrated HCl or NaOH powder, the temperature in the detecting reservoir changes in the same direction under non-local influence of the water in the manipulation reservoir mediated through quantum entanglement and, under the condition that the detecting reserve is able to exchange heat with its local environment so that the local thermodynamic energy is conserved, as if the heat or lack of it in manipulation reservoir is directly available to the water in the detecting reservoir. Third, when water in manipulation reservoir is manipulated though extreme cooling, heating or mixing with large quantum-entangled mass, e.g., water, such that the quantum entanglement of the water under manipulation with its local environment changes, the weight of the water in the detecting reservoir also changes under the non-local influence of the manipulation reservoir mediated through quantum entanglement so that, it is hereby predicted, that the gravitational energy/potential is globally conserved. We again suggest here that the said quantum entities inside water are likely nuclear spins for the reasons discussed above in Section 6 (a). What we have done are the following: (1) We have found that the pH value of water in a detecting reservoir quantum-entangled with water in a remote reservoir changes in the same direction as that in the remote water when the latter is manipulated under the condition that the water in the detecting reservoir is able to exchange energy with its local environment; (2) We have also found that the temperature of water in a detecting reservoir quantum-entangled with water in a remote reservoir can change against the temperature of its local environment when the latter is manipulated under the condition that the water in the detecting reservoir is able to exchange energy with its local environment; (3) We have further found that the gravity of water in a detecting reservoir quantum-entangled with water in a remote reservoir can change against the gravity of its local environment when the latter was remotely manipulated such that, it is hereby predicted, the gravitational energy/potential is globally conserved; and (4) Thus, among ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 927 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources other things we have realized non-local signaling using three different physical observables - pH value, temperature and gravity. However, as with many other experimental findings, independent replications are the key to verify our results. Therefore, we urge all interested scientists and the like to do their own experiments to verify and extend our findings. Perhaps the most shocking is our experimental demonstration of Newton's instantaneous gravity and Mach's instantaneous connection conjecture and the relationship between gravity and quantum entanglement. Our findings also imply that the properties of all matters can be affected non-locally through quantum entanglement mediated processes. Second, the second law of thermodynamics may not hold when two quantum-entangled systems together with their respective local environments are considered as two isolated systems and one of them is manipulated. Third, gravity has a non-local aspect associated with quantum entanglement thus can be non-locally manipulated through quantum entanglement mediated processes. On a more fundamental level, our findings shed new lights on the nature and characteristics of quantum entanglement and gravity, reveal the true conflict between quantum theory and Einstein’s theories of relativity, provide vital clues for resolution of the measurement problem in quantum mechanics, and support non-local hidden variable based theories such as Bohmian mechanics and a non-local cosmology. Finally, our experimental findings show that macroscopic quantum effects such as quantum non-locality are robust in liquids such as water and maybe even in gases and solids at room temperature, thus support the proposition that quantum effects play important roles in biological systems including the functions of brain and consciousness. Our results also suggest that in quantum-entangled systems such as biological systems, quantum information may drive such systems to more ordered states against the disorderly effect of environmental heat. 7. Summary of Experimental Supports Spin-mediated consciousness theory is supported by and, in the meantime, can explain all the existing experimental results obtained in the following areas of research: 1. Parapsychology: e.g., Rupert Sheldrake (see 2009), Dean Radin (see 2006). 2. Homeopathy (water memory): e.g., Jacques Benveniste (see Davenas et. al, 1988). 3. Remote effect of Human Intention: e.g., Robert Jahn & Brenna Dunne (see 2009), William Tiller (see 2007), Masaru Emoto? (see 2005), Uri Geller? (see 1999), various Qigong effects. 4. Non-local corrections of EEG: e.g., J. Grinberg-Zylberbaum (1987), Jiri Wackermann (see, 2004). 5. Sensed presence and altered state of consciousness under magnetic stimulations: Persinger e.t. al. (see, 1993, 2010a). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 928 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources 5. Non-local corrections of MRI signals: e.g., Jeanne Achterberg (2005). 6. Non-local correlations of EEG under magnetic stimulations: Michael Persinger, et. al. (2003, 2010b). 7. Non-local pattern in cognitive functions: e.g., Diederik Aerts et. al. (see 2000), Elio Conte et. al. (2003, 2010). 8. Light/environment-induced biological effects: e.g., Peter Gariaev (see, 1991), Bevan Reid (1989). 9. Consciousness collapse wave function: e.g., Dick J. Bierman (2003), also see Mark Germine? (1998). 10. Non-local effects of chemical substances on the Brain: Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu (2006a-c). 11. Non-local chemical, thermal and gravitational effects: Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu (2006d, 2007a-b). 12. Optical illusions: Efstratios Manousakis? (2007), Elio Conte et. al.(2009). In this paper, we have summarized experimental support to spin-mediated consciousness theory from various sources including the results of our own. In doing so, we have also provided explanations based on this theory to experimental phenomena such as out-of-body experience and sensed presence, quantum-like cognitive functions and optical illusions. Whether one agrees or not with the spin-mediated consciousness theory is left for one alone to judge. In any event, the importance of the experimental results mentioned in this paper is obvious: quantum effects play important roles in brain/cognitive functions despite of the denials and suspicions of the naysayer and skeptics. Appendix: Theoretical Consideration Our current view is that Consciousness is both transcendent and immanent, that is, the transcendental aspect of Consciousness produces and influences reality through self-referential spin as the interactive output of Consciousness and, in turn, reality produces and influences immanent aspect of Consciousness as the interactive input to Consciousness also through self-referential spin (Hu, 2008b & 2009). Indeed, our experimental results on quantum entanglement of the brain with external substances suggest that Consciousness is not located in the brain but associated with prespacetime (Hu & Wu, 2006a-c). These results support the proposition that the transcendental aspect of Consciousness is the basis of reality. What is human consciousness, then? It is our view that human consciousness is a limited or individualized version of the above dual-aspect Consciousness such that we have limited free will and limited observation/experience which is mostly classical at macroscopic levels but quantum at microscopic levels (Id.). For example, as a limited transcendental consciousness, we ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 929 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources have through free will the choice of what measurement to do in a quantum experiment but not the ability to control the result of measurement (at least not until we can harness the abilities of our consciousness). That is, the result appears to us as random. On the other hand, at the macroscopic level, we also have the choice through free will of what to do but the outcome, depending on context, is sometimes certain and at other times uncertain. Further, as a limited immanent consciousness, we can only observe the measurement result in a quantum experiment that we conduct and experience the macroscopic environment surrounding us as the classical world (Id.). We now turn our attention to the details of how human experience (as limited immanent consciousness) is produced through the brain and how human free-will (as limited transcendental Consciousness) may operate through the brain according the principle of existence (Hu & Wu, 2009, 2010). As illustrated in Figure 2.1, there are two kinds of interactions between an object (entity) outside the brain (body) and the brain (body). The first and commonly known kind is the direct physical and/or chemical interactions such as sensory input through the eyes. The second and lesser-known but experimentally proven to be true kind is the instantaneous interactions through quantum entanglement. The entire world outside our brain (body) is associated with our brain (body) through quantum entanglement thus influencing and/or generating not only our feelings, emotions and dreams but also the physical, chemical and physiological states of our brain and body. Figure 1. Interaction between an object and the brain (body) in the dual-world Importantly, quantum entanglement may participate in (thus explain) visual experience and altered states of consciousness such as sensed presence and out-of-body experience which have been extensively studied experimentally by the Persinger’s group in particular. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 930 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources By way of an example (keep in mind that an interaction with the external world is accompanied by its counterpart interaction with the internal world): (1) A light ray reflected and/or emitted from an object outside the brain enters the eye, gets absorbed, converted and amplified in the retina as propagating action potentials which travel to the central nervous system (CNS); (2) In the CNS, the action potentials drive and influence the mind pixels which according our theory is the nuclei such as protons with net nuclear spins and/or electrons with unpaired spins; and (3) Either the driven or influenced dynamic patterns of the mind-pixels in the internal world form the experience of the object, or more likely our visual experience of the object is the direct experience of the object in the external world through quantum entanglement established by the physical interactions. In the latter case, there is no image of the outside world in the brain. Further, in the case in which the object outside the brain is an image such as a photograph, there also exists the possibility that our visual experience is not only the experience of the photograph as such through quantum entanglement but also the experience of the object within the photograph through additional quantum entanglement. We hope that through careful experiments, we can find out which mechanism is actually true or whether both are true in reality. The action potentials in the retina, the neural pathways and the CNS are driven by voltage-gated ion channels on neural membranes as embodied by the Hodgkin-Huxley model:  tVm    1    Vm  Ei gi  Cm  i  (1) where Vm is the electric potential across the neural membranes, Cm is the capacitance of the membranes, gi is the ith voltage-gated or constant-leak ion channel (also see, Hu & Wu, 2004c & 2004d). The overall effect of the action potentials and other surrounding factors, especially the magnetic dipoles carried by oxygen molecules due to their two unpaired electrons, is that inside the neural membranes and proteins, there exist varying strong electric field E and fluctuating magnetic field B that are also governed by the Maxwell equation: - σ  p  σ  E   E     0 or E  iσ  B  - σ p  tE    B      t B    E   E  0     B  0    (2) where we have set the classical (macroscopic) electric density and current j    , j  0 inside the neural membranes. Further, for simplicity, we have not considered the medium effect of the membranes, that is, we have treated the membranes as a vacuum. Microscopically, electromagnetic fields E and B or their electromagnetic potential representation A   , A : ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 931 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources  E     t A     B   A  (3) interact with proton of charge e and unpaired electron of charge –e respectively as the following Dirac-Maxwell systems:   E e  m σp eA  e,      L M   0       σp eA  E e  m  i ,   p (4) - σ  p  σ  E    iσ  ( † α )   E     E  iσ  B    i ( †  )  p - σ p (5) and   E  e  m σ p  eA  e,     L M   0        σ p  eA  E  e  m  i ,   e (6) - σ  p  σ  E    iσ  ( † α )   E     E  iσ  B    i ( †  )  e - σ p where β and α are Dirac matrices. (7) In equations (4) and (6), the interactions (couplings) of E and/or B with proton and/or electron spin operator (σ)p and (σ)e are hidden. But they are due to the self-referential Matrix Law which causes mixing of the external and internal wave functions and can be made explicit in the determinant view as follows. For Dirac form, we have:   E e  m σp eA  e,      LM   0        σp eA  E e  m  i ,   p   E  e  m E  e  m            I 2 e,  i ,   0      σ  p  eA  σ  p  eA     p  (8)   E  e   m2  p  eA   eσ  B I 2 e,  i,   0 p 2 2 For Weyl (chiral) form, we have: m   E  e σp  eA    e,r    0     m E  e  σp  eA    i ,l   p (9)  E  e  σ  p  eA E  e  σ  p  eA   m 2 I 2 e,r i,l  0p     E  e   m 2  p  eA   eσ  B-ieσ  E I 2 e,r i,l  0 p 2 2 These two couplings are also explicitly shown in Dirac-Hestenes formulism or during the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 932 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources process of non-relativistic approximation of the Dirac equation in the present of external electromagnetic potential Aμ. We can carry out the same procedures for an electron to show the explicit couplings of (σ)e with E and B. One effect of the couplings is that the action potentials through E and B (or Aμ) input information into the mind-pixels in the brain (Hu & Wu, 2004c, 2004d & 2008a). Judging from the above Dirac-Maxwell systems, we are inclined to think that said information is likely carried in the temporal and spatial variations of E and B (frequencies and timing of neural electric spikes and their spatial distributions in the CNS). Another possible effect of the couplings is that they allow the transcendental aspect of consciousness through wave functions (the self fields) of the proton and/or electron to back-influence E and B (or Aμ) which in turn back-affect the action potentials through the Hodgkin-Huxley neural circuits in the CNS (also see, Hu & Wu, 2007d & 2008a). We will carry out detailed studies of the above sketched possible mechanisms elsewhere. Here we will speculate a bit about how human free-will as a macroscopic quality of limited transcendental consciousness may originate microscopically under the particular high electric voltage environment inside the neural membranes. For example, one possibility is that the human free will as thought or imagination produces changes in the phase of external and internal wave functions: ei 0  e i ( Et px )i ( Et px )  e i ( Et px ) e e i ( Et px ) i (10) where ( )e and ( )i respectively indicate external and internal wave functions, which in turn back-affect E and B (or Aμ) in the high electric voltage neural membranes through the Dirac Maxwell systems illustrated above. REFERENCE Achterberg, J. et. al., Evidence for correlations between distant intentionality and brain function in recipients: A functional magnetic resonance imaging analysis. J. Altertaive & Complimentary Med., 2005; 11 (6): 965–971. Aerts, D. et. al. The violation of bell inequalities in the macroworld. Foundations of Physics, 2000; 30(9): 1387-1414. Bierman, J. B. Does consciousness collapse the wave-packet? Mind & Matter, 2003; 1(1): 45-77 Bokkon, I. Dreams and neuroholography: an interdisciplinary interpretation of development of homeotherm state in evolution. Sleep and Hypnosis, 2005; 7: 61-76. Chanelière,T et al. Storage and retrieval of single photons transmitted between remote quantum memorie. Nature 2005: 438: 833-836. Davenas E, Beauvais F, Amara J, et al. Human basophil degranulation triggered by very dilute antiserum against IgE, Nature, 1988; 333 (6176): 816–8. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 933 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources Dirac, PAM. The quantum theory of the electron. Proc. R. Soc. 1928; A117: 610-624. Conte, E. et. al. A preliminary evidence of quantum like behavior in measurements of mental states. 2003; arXiv:quant-ph/0307201v1. Conte, E. et. al. Mental states follow quantum mechanics during perception and cognition of ambiguous figures. Open Systems and Information Dynamics, 2009; 16(1): 85-100. Conte, E. et. al. A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Enequality in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality. JCER, 2010: 1(7): 831-849. Emoto, M., The Hidden Messages in Water, 2005, Atria. Feng, el al. Theoretical expectations for the muon's electric dipole moment.Nucl.Phys.2001; B613: 366-381. Gariaev, P.P., et. al., Holographic Associative Memory of Biological Systems, Proceedings SPIE, Optical Memory and Neural Networks, 199; 1621: 280- 291. Gauthier R. The Dirac http://superluminalquantum.org equation and the superluminal electron model. 2006; Geller, U. et al., Mind Medicine: The Secret Of Powerful Healing, 1999, Element Books Ltd. Germine, M. Experimental Model for Collapse of the Wavefunction. Dynamical Psychology, 1998: http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/1998/collapse.html Gershenfeld, N, Chuang, IL. Bulk spin resonance quantum computation. Science 1997; 275: 350–356. Ghosh, S, Rosenbaum, TF, Aeppli, G, Coppersmith, SN. Entangled quantum state of magnetic dipoles. Nature: 2003; 425: 48-51. Graesser, M. & Thomas, S. Supersymmetric relations among electromagnetic dipole operators. Phys. Rev. 2002; D65: 075012. Grinberg-Zylberbaum, J. & Ramos, J., Patterns of interhemispheric correlation during human communication. International Journal of Neuroscience, 1987; 36: 41–53. Hestenes, D. Quantum mechanics from self-interaction. Found. Phys. 1983; 15: 63–78. Hestenes D. Spacetime physics with geometric algebra. Am. J. Phys. 2003; 71 (6): 691-714. Hestenes D. Zitterbewegung in Quantum Mechanics -- a research program. arXiv 2008a; [quant-ph] 0802.2728. Hestenes D. Reading the Electron Clock. arXiv 2008a; [quant-ph] 0802.3227. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Mechanism of anesthetic action: oxygen pathway perturbation hypothesis. Med. Hypotheses 2001a: 57: 619-627. Also see arXiv 2001b; physics/0101083. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 934 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin-mediated consciousness theory. arXiv 2002; quant-ph/0208068. Also see Med. Hypotheses 2004a: 63: 633-646. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Spin as primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2004b; 2:41-49. Also see Cogprints: ID2827 2003. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Action potential modulation of neural spin networks suggests possible role of spin in memory and consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2004c; 2:309-316. Also see Cogprints: ID3458 2004d. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Thinking outside the box: the essence and implications of quantum entanglement. NeuroQuantology 2006a; 4: 5-16. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Photon induced non-local effect of general anesthetics on the brain. NeuroQuantology 2006b 4: 17-31. Also see Progress in Physics 2006c; v3: 20-26. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Evidence of non-local physical, chemical and biological effects supports quantum brain. NeuroQuantology 2006d; 4: 291-306. Also see Progress in Physics 2007a; v2: 17-24. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Thinking outside the box II: the origin, implications and applications of gravity and its role in consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2007b; 5: 190-196. Hu, H. & Wu, M. On dark chemistry: what’s dark matter and how mind influences brain through proactive spin. NeuroQuantology 2007c; 5: 205-213. Hu, H. & Wu, M. Concerning spin as mind-pixel: how mind interacts with the brain through electric spin effects. NeuroQuantology 2008a; 6: 26-31. Hu, H. The state of science, religion and consciousness. NeuroQuantology 2008b; 6: 323-332. Hu, H. Quantum enigma - physics encounters consciousness (book review). Psyche 2009; 15: 1-4. Hu, H. & Wu, M. The principle of existence: Toward a scientific theory of everything. viXra.org, 2009: http://vixra.org/abs/0912.0047; JCER, 2010; 1(1): 50-119. Jahn, R. G., Dunne, B. J., Margins of Reality: The Role of Consciousness in the Physical World, 2009, ICRL Press. Julsgaard, B, Kozhekin, A, Polzik, ES. Experimentally long-lived entanglement of two macroscopic objects. Nature 2001; 413: 400–403. Julsgaard, B, Sherson, J, Cirac, JI, Fiurasek, J, Polzik, ES. Experimental demonstration of quantum memory for light. Nature 2004; 432: 482–485. Khitrin, AK, Ermakov, VL, Fung, BM. Information storage using a cluster of dipolar-coupled spins. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2002; 360: 161–166. Manousakis, E. Quantum formalism to describe binocular rivalry, 2007: arXiv:0709.4516v2 [q-bio.NC]; also see Biosystems, 2009; 98: 57-66. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 935 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources Matsukevich, DN & Kuzmich, A. Quantum state transfer between matter and light. Science 2004; 306: 663–666. Mulligan, B.P., Hunter, M.D. & Persinger, M.A. Effects of geomagnetic activity and atmospheric power variations on quantitative measures of brain activity: replication of the Azerbaijani studies. Advances in Space Research, 2010; 45: 940-948. Nowack, et al. Coherent control of a single electron spin with electric fields. Science Express 2007; DOI: 10.1126/science.1148092. Persinger, M. A., Vectorial cerebral hemisphericity as differential sources for the sensed presence, mystical experiences and religious conversions. Psychological Reports, 1993; 76: 915-930. Persinger, M.A., Koren, S.A. & Tsang, E.W. Enhanced power within a specific band of theta activity in one person while another receives circumcerebral pulsed magnetic fields: a mechanism for cognitive influence at a distance? Perceptual and Motor Skills, 2003; 97: 877-894. Persinger, M. A. et.al. The Electromagnetic Induction of Mystical and Altered States within the Laboratory, JCER, 2010a; 1(7): 808-830. Persinger, M. A. & Lavallee , C. F., The Electromagnetic Induction of Mystical and Altered States within the Laboratory, JCER, 2010b; 1(7): 785-807. Radin, D., Entangled Minds: Extrasensory Experiences in a Quantum Reality, 2006, Paraview Pocket Books. Rauscher, E A & Targ, R. The speed of thought: Investigation of a complex space-time metric to describe psychic phenomena. J. Sci. Explor. 2001; 15: 331-354. Reid, B. L. On the nature of growth and new growth based on experiments designed to reveal a structure and function for laboratory space. Medical Hypotheses, 1989; 29: 105-127. Rivas M. Kinematical formalism of elementary spinning particles. arXiv 2005; physics/0509131. Rosser, W G V. An introduction to the theory of relativity, P326. London Butterworths, Press 1964. Shen, S Q. Spin transverse force on spin current in an electric field. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005; 95: 187203. Silenko, A J. Quantum-mechanical description of the electromagnetic interaction of relativistic particles with electric and magnetic dipole moments. Russ.Phys.J. 2005; 48: 788-792. Salesi, G, Recami, E. Hydrodynamics of spinning particles. Phys. Rev.1998; A57: 98–105. Sheldrake, R., Morphic Resonance: The Nature of Formative Causation, 2009, Park Street Press. Sun, Q F et al. Spin-current-induced electric field. Phys. Rev. B 2004; 69: 054409. Tiller, W. A., Psychoenergetic Science, 2007, Pavior. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | November 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 8 | pp. 907-936 936 Hu, H &Wu, M. Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources Wackermann, J., Dyadic correlations between brain functional states: present facts and future perspectives. Mind and Matter, 2004; 2(1): 105–122. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com

891 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 891-898 Nixon, G., Editor’s Introduction: Transcending Self-Consciousness Editor’s Introduction Transcending Self-Consciousness Gregory M. Nixon* What is this thing we each call “I” and consider the eye of consciousness, that which beholds objects in the world and objects in our minds? This inner perceiver seems to be the same I who calls forth memories or images at will, the I who feels and determines whether to act on those feelings or suppress them, as well as the I who worries and makes plans and attempts to avoid those worries and act on those plans. Am I the subject, thus the source, of my awareness, just as you are the subject and source of your awareness? If this is the case, it is likely impossible to be conscious without the self (yours or mine), the eye of consciousness, and it must certainly not be desirable, for such a consciousness would have no focal point, no self-that-is-conscious to guide it, so it would be cast adrift on wide and wild sea like a boat that has broken from its anchor. Without self-enclosure, “We shall go mad no doubt and die that way,” as Robert Graves (1927/1966) expressed it. Graves was, however, referring to the loss of language. I find it intriguing to observe how intimate is the association among language, culture, and self (and by this latter term, I refer explicitly to self-consciousness). It is as though they are scions from the same root. Here’s the lines in Graves’ “The Cool Web” that precede the above: There’s a cool web of language winds us in, Retreat from too much joy or too much fear: We grow sea-green at last and coldly die In brininess and volubility. But if we let our tongues lose self-possession, Throwing off language and its watery clasp Before our death, instead of when death comes, Facing the wide glare of the children’s day, Facing the rose, the dark sky and the drums, We shall go mad no doubt and die that way. Graves sees language as a cool web that filters us “from too much joy or too much fear”. Without it, we would be open to uncultivated, animal awareness in the moment, similar to the unmediated awareness of children. Presumably the mediation of language has gives us a cool distance from the intensity of being; it allows us to gain much control over our environment as well binding our own untamed emotions. He indicates that by “throwing off language and its watery *Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada. Websty: http://www3.telus.net/public/doknyx/ & http://unbc.academia.edu/GregoryNixon/ Email: doknyx@telus.net ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 892 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 891-898 Nixon, G., Editor’s Introduction: Transcending Self-Consciousness clasp”, we would also “lose self-possession” and apparently go mad and die as a result. Of course, Graves is likely writing with the irony of the modernist poet, smiling grimly or perhaps sadly at our distance from raw experience. I chose the excerpt from this poem since it so directly expresses our own distance from what some refer to as raw experience or, contrarily pure consciousness, or, more simply, as being or the real (though in each there are layers of complexity not dealt with here). Oh, we are still animals and all of us have been children, so we have experienced unfettered, reactive awareness within the context of our species. We, ourselves, remain nested within such open-ended awareness, yet we are different: we have developed a new context within the larger context of embodied being, a context that reduces natural awareness while increasing cultural consciousness (otherwise known as self-consciousness). I am telling you this by writing these words on this page with my iMac keyboard, which you are reading because you have spent time learning to do so, and this is not even to mention the complex cultural knowledge that has gone into building the computer whose screen you’re looking at or the creating the journal you hold in your hands. We interact through a mediated environment (so the media itself becomes our new environment) made of inventions and symbols. We do not see, smell, hear or touch each other so have become, for all intents and purposes, disembodied writing and reading programs. Our selfhood is entirely representational, our context for being radically divorced from nature but just as radically expanded into the lived reality of cultural symbol and artefact. As Robert Jay Lifton stated, “Culture is inseparable from symbolization” (1993, p. 13), referring to the distinctive attribute of human culture. We are the animal symbolicum (Cassirer, 1944), the symbolic animal that has become aware of its own awareness. We have been drawn into intersubjective mutuality – identifying with others within our cultural spectrum and, from that position outside our natural embodiment, have observed, conceived and named our own being. We each call it “myself” or “I” or “me”, and unquestioningly accept specific names most often given to us by our parents. Given time and consistent behavioural modification, we reify the self-name so that we mistake it for the reality it represents. We objectify our natural subjectivity, watching ourselves from the outside to make sure our actions or even our thoughts are appropriate. It may be said that we gain a self but lose the soul (in the sense of non-self-conscious awareness that participates in the world). Let me clear, by self I mean our learned self-concept, what psychology once called ego – that which postmodernists recognize as a cultural construction and phenomenologists call self-consciousness. (I do not refer here to the self as the subjective perspective of a body or system but to the objective concept of that self.) Language and symbolization remain both the content and the boundary of selfconsciousness. Language allows us to name our own embodied experience in an ongoing present and call it consciousness. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 893 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 891-898 Nixon, G., Editor’s Introduction: Transcending Self-Consciousness But here is the quandary — by naming itself, natural experience becomes an object to itself, that is, the subject becomes an object to itself to the extent that it identifies with other culturally constructed selves and names its own existence. One becomes self-conscious. All we directly know of consciousness is our own consciousness and, according to Zahavi (2005), philosophical phenomenology agrees that all human consciousness is self-consciousness, even when not recognized as such. One of the most important phenomenologists, Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1968), could see that the self, which we individually identify as our subjectivity, is in fact an object among other objects in an objective world: The cleavage between the “subjective” and the “objective” according to which physics defines its domain … and correlatively psychology also establishes its domain, does not prevent [the subjective and objective] from being conceived according to the same fundamental structure; on the contrary it requires that: they are finally two orders of objects, to be known in their intrinsic properties by a pure thought which determines what they are in themselves. … [A] moment comes when the very development of knowledge calls into question the absolute spectator always presupposed. (pp. 19–20)1 So our living bodies identify themselves as selves in a world of other selves, a world otherwise known as symbolic culture. Body-world awareness becomes relegated to that which we call the unconscious mind, the source of conscious selfhood, while the self assumes the role of conscious agent and believes itself to be the entity that perceives and experiences through the body and strives to be the commander-inchief of all thoughts and carnal actions (which it never is). Selves communicate to selves, just as we are doing here, but it becomes very difficult, if not impossible to speak of embodied or world awareness since it is by definition beyond definition, that is, beyond the words and symbols that make up the very boundaries of the self. In former times, when coherent culturally embraced religions or spiritual codes were accepted unquestioningly, transcending the self to be nearer to God or the Gods or to travel in spirit worlds was an accepted reality. In this case, it was clear what was beyond the individual self – a spiritual reality, but one still verified by the culture. In these cosmopolitan, modern, and postmodern times, no one has a crosscultural vision of self-transcendence that is accepted everywhere (since global cultures now seed each other and few seem even willing to discuss anything spiritual). It now seems impossible even to conceive of any sort of awareness beyond culturally-determined self-consciousness. We have crossed the bridge from relational animal-world awareness into symbolic interaction and there seems to be no way out, as modernist philosopher Ernst Cassirer (1944) noted: Yet there is no remedy against this reversal of the natural order. Man cannot escape from his own achievement. He cannot but adopt the conditions of his 1 My thanks to Steven M. Rosen (2008) for bringing this quotation to my attention. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 894 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 891-898 Nixon, G., Editor’s Introduction: Transcending Self-Consciousness own life. No longer in a merely physical universe, man lives in a symbolic universe. Language, myth, art, and religion are parts of this universe. They are the varied threads which weave the symbolic net, the tangled web of human experience. (p. 25) No way out? It seems we have indeed become prisoners of our own device. Perhaps it is true: we cannot escape the self we are or have become. Its very fabric is made of our memories (and narratives of those memories); memory tells us who one is, and one is the one who remembers. If we had an experience absolutely, totally beyond the self, there would be no observer, thus no one to remember the event, thus the experience would have happened to no one. Do such experiences take place? Postmodern philosopher-psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan deals with the biological substrate with his conception of the “real”, referring, it seems, to raw, instinctive drives. Alan Sheridan, in a translator's note to Lacan's Ecrits (1977), explains this: The “real” ... stands for what is neither symbolic nor imaginary, and remains foreclosed from the analytic experience, which is an experience of speech. What is prior to the assumption of the symbolic, the real in its “raw” state (in the case of the subject, for instance, the organism and its biological needs), may only be supposed, it is an algebraic x. (pp. ix-x) Experience of the “real”, outside language, must therefore certainly happen but can lead to no new knowledge since it has no means of being recalled by the self. As soon as comprehension is attempted, the experience becomes symbolized, and the “raw” experience becomes transformed into an object of memory and assimilated into the past of the self. It is no longer self-transcendent experience. But if the self is identified with self-consciousness, transcending it may not mean its obliteration, as it must when experience occurs without an observing self (e.g., in the case of the wild animal and younger children). Once selfhood has been attained, one need not keep self-consciousness at the centre of awareness (egocentricity). In fact, as I have previously suggested (Nixon, 2010), in times of personal crisis or under the spell of creative inspiration, our thoughts or actions or perceptions may spring from a source we, ourselves, had not known was there. Consciousness of self is temporarily ignored, so the body – the incarnate soul that is always in tune with the invisible natural forces – may itself act (in the way we call spontaneous). And, of course, there are the other times when such egocentricity is overthrown in acts of selflessness (as indicated in the article by Syamala Hari). In such cases, soul may awaken, with the self present on the sidelines, as it were, to bear witness, or as an organ through which one may communicate with other selves. Obliteration of self is loss of identity (as in death?), but transcendence of self-consciousness is possible. Self-transcendence should not be confused with the self-transformation that takes place throughout one’s life. One changes, often in unexpected ways, but the self still ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 895 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 891-898 Nixon, G., Editor’s Introduction: Transcending Self-Consciousness feels it is at helm of action and is the guiding light of consciousness. The self may be transformed so it becomes more transparent or permeable, and, in that way, one edges towards self-transcendence. But absolute transcendence of the self would dissolve that self with original awareness continuing in an unfathomably intense present without a past or future. Awareness-in-itself could be said to be aware of nothing or of everything, for without differentiation there could be no difference. But, self-consciousness transcended (as opposed to self-dissolution, so the remembering self remains itself remembered) could have metaphysical implications: Those who have cultivated the transcending of self-consciousness in life, experiencing it over and over again and gaining a measure of control over the awakening, may well be able to retain the artifacts of selfhood – memories – as original awareness leaves the body behind, that is, in death. Just as the electricity continues after the light bulb darkens, in either case, life energy withdraws from the body but continues as unbound dynamism, but, in the latter case of self as silent witness, the memories of a lifetime may go with it, perhaps to enrich the manifold of experience in that source, which, in this way undergoes change and learning. Without those memories, able to withstand such radical decentering, the self dies with the body. None of this is to imply that the transcendence of self-consciousness is any way spiritual, that is, supernatural or out-of-this-world. Of those realms, many have written, but I have no knowledge of such things or of anyone who does. In fact, transcendence is less the discovery of new consciousness and more the reawakening to old consciousness. “The awakening is really the rediscovery or the excavation of a long lost treasure,” as the great Zen interpreter, D. T. Suzuki (1964, p. 179) so well expressed it. Further, transcending means transcending our isolated self-consciousness, not transcending the world or nature that made consciousness possible in the first place: There is in every one of us, though varied in depth and strength, an eternal longing for “something” which transcends a world of inequalities. … “To transcend” suggests “going beyond,” “being away from,” that is, a separation, a dualism. I have, however, no desire to hint that the “something” stands away from the world in which we find ourselves. (p. 196) The transcending of self-consciousness, in this view, is to return to embodiment and its intimate intermingling with the natural world, and perhaps there is a further step — to finally transcend the conscious contexts of life and carnality into pure subjectivity yet retain the memorial artifacts of a self once lived. **** None of the articles in this issue precisely agree with me on this. In fact, they are wonderful in the variety of understandings to do with the self and with consciousness – and with the transcendence or transformation of self or consciousness. I will ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 896 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 891-898 Nixon, G., Editor’s Introduction: Transcending Self-Consciousness be the first to admit that I have been affected by each, and also that I have been humbled by what I have learned. My assumptions about selfhood, its construction, and its transcendence have been deconstructed and reconstructed, even as I edited, and I have had to modify – or open – my views. How one transcends the self depends on the self that experiences it. Is it instigated or sought, does it happen by accident, or by an act of Grace? Is it common or rare? Is it brought on by the ingestion of psychedelic agents or by mediation or by being overcome by fear or merely by caring more about the welfare of others than oneself? Is it transcendence to experience a shift of perspective or dissolution of the self? In the pages that follow, each of these paths is explored in nine ways, each unique unto itself. None of them deal with absolute self-transcendence, which should be no surprise, for, as I’ve indicated, there would no longer a self or person to record or communicate the event. Many of them deal the transcendence of selfconsciousness, my own included, but only two describe the ingestion of mindaltering psychedelics to catalyze the event. One sees self-construction from the ground-up, as it were, as a form of transcending a previous self that has disintegrated. One looks to acts of kindness to sidestep the illusion of selfconsciousness. Two, at least, look to creative experience in the arts as a way to connect with universal spontaneity, but in very different ways. The others refer to what might be called spiritual experiences that, though thirsted for or sought, arrive unexpectedly, almost like a gift. A brief preview of each follows, without giving away too much lest the reader feel s/he has already gotten the gist of the piece, thus depriving him- or herself of fine writing and an amazing narrative. Christopher Holvenstot has contributed two articles. In the first one, “Modeling a World”, he describes a recurring experience that must have been more wrenching to write about than it was to read (and it is wrenching to read). He periodically feels himself descend into such a state of non-identity that he nears catatonia. This selfdissolution is sort of self-transcendence in reverse. But he describes how he has learned to model selfhood by observing others and then becoming that self. In his second article, “Making Meaning”, he tells of his involvement in an intense psychodrama workshop in which individual dreams are enacted by the group. Such interpersonal actualization leads him not only to new awareness but even to new ways of dreaming. Milenko Budimir describes his engagement with meditation practice and how it began to change his life by allowing him experiences that can only be described as self-transcendent. It was good to hear from someone who has had such experiences as recently as the 1990s since it is truly amazing how many people had their peak experiences between the years of 1967 and 1972. And, despite this being called the psychedelic era of the youth revolution, many of those who had such awakenings in that time never ingested any psychedelics! It’s as though it was a time when an ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 897 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 891-898 Nixon, G., Editor’s Introduction: Transcending Self-Consciousness irruption of the sacred (as Mircea Eliade somewhere phrased it) broke into our world, as it has in other notable periods of history. Milenko has given me peace of mind by assuring me that such self-transcendence continues to occur, albeit rarely. Chris Nunn is one those who had such transcendent awakenings in that late sixtiesearly seventies period that they must be called mystical, that is, they are imbued with an undeniable sense of “something far more deeply interfused” (to paraphrase Wordsworth) that is experienced as sacred and possibly even spiritual. For Chris, such experiences were occasionally repeated at other times, too, but with lesser intensity; however, by his description, this may be because they have now been assimilated into his personality and life-philosophy and are part of who he is. Syalmala Hari takes a unique view and runs two parallel tracks in intriguing prose. In one track, she investigates consciousness – or is it self-consciousness? – by suggesting it is a product of the memory functions of the brain, thus unreal. She seems to agree with Merleau-Ponty that the consciousness we name may be more an object than private subjectivity. We are instead part of absolute subjectivity, even if we are too self-centered to know this. In her second track, she investigates her own experience noting how unselfish acts of compassion or kindness lead to selfforgetting or even selflessness, and in that way are self-transcendent. Roland Cichowski compellingly describes his tendency to have mystical awakenings even as a young child. These awakened in him a thirst to understand why the doors of perception were opened and he began a lifelong quest. At first he sought answers from others, especially as found in books, but, though these may have coloured his expectations, in the end the profound mystical experience that shook him to his soul was entirely unexpected and as terrifying as it was ecstatic. Roland’s learning had prepared him to deal with the lifelong consequences of his natural awakening, whereas, in my own case, I had no concepts I could apply in the aftermath. Phil Wolfson writes of a life of natural transformations that still continue today. But he also writes unabashedly of a plethora of journeys into other realities brought on by planned experimentation with a veritable pharmacopeia of psychedelic (mindaltering) or entheogenic (inducing spiritual awakenings). He even draws up a taxonomy of such experiences, both positive and negative. He is such a veteran of altered states and even spirit travelling that he might be considered a modern-day shaman. Clearly, he is not a whacked-out tripster but one of our wise men. The most visually stunning piece is New York painter Tobi Zausner’s “Transcending the Self Through Art”, which includes 8 plates, one of which is on the cover of this issue and another on her title page. In her elegant prose, she recognizes that the source of creative inspiration is always self-transcendent, beyond the boundaries of ego. In fact, one must suppress the ego and its chattering to open oneself to the silence from which creative intuition or arrives. The receptive body must respond to ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 898 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | October 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 7 | pp. 891-898 Nixon, G., Editor’s Introduction: Transcending Self-Consciousness hints from elsewhere or elsewhen (perhaps the world itself) to give form to the whisperings of the Muses. We are honoured to include this fine work. In the last piece, I gave form with painful honesty to my own life-altering awakening at 19 as the result of a very powerful LSD trip. My story is like Joseph Campbell’s journey of hero (1949/1968) in that there is a call, a series of trials, a victory, and a return, sometimes followed by a resurrection. In my case, however, I was unable to cope with what had happened and my return was to a self now in such a state of disintegration that I was in danger of losing my way forever. My resurrection, as such, is still in process. This was not easy to write. All in all, it should be recognized that no theory or philosophy is built entirely from abstract concepts or logical reasoning or experimental evidence. All of us are the speaking animals of the planet we call Earth, and we each have had experiences (remembered or not) that have guided our thinking and given us our destiny. References Campbell, Joseph (1968). The Hero with a Thousand Faces (2nd ed). Princeton University Press, Bolligen Series XVII. Original 1949. Cassirer, Ernst (1944). An Essay On Man: An Introduction to a Philosophy of Human Culture. Yale University Press. Graves, Robert (1927). The cool web. In Collected Poems (1966, p. 45). Doubleday Anchor. Lacan, Jacques (1977). Ecrits: A Selection (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Norton. Lifton, Robert Jay (1993). The Protean Self: Human Resilience in an Age of Fragmentation. BasicBooks. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice (1968). The Visible and the Invisible, followed by working notes (A. Lingis, Trans.). Northwestern University Press. First published in French, 1964. Nixon, Gregory M. (2010). Time and experience: Twins of the eternal now? Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research 1 (5): Time & Consciousness: Two Faces of One Mystery? July, 2010, 482-489. Rosen, Steven M. (2008). Bridging the two cultures: Merleau-Ponty and the crisis in modern physics. Karl Jaspers Forum, Target Article 107, May, 2008. Online: http://www.kjf.ca/107-TAROS.rtf Suzuki, Daisetz T. (1964). The awakening of a new consciousness in Zen (pp. 179202). In J. Campbell (Ed.). Man and Transformation: Papers from the Eranos Yearbooks. Bollingen Series XXX — 5. Princeton University Press. First published in Eranos-Jahrbücher XXIII, 1954. Zahavi, Dan (2005). Subjectivity and Selfhood: Investigating the First-Person Perspective. MIT Press. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 354 Commentary The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge Marc Hersch* ABSTRACT In my commentary on Greg Nixon’s articles, “Myth and Mind” and “Hollows of Experience”, I begin with a discussion of those definitions and principles regarding consciousness in which Nixon and I are in agreement. Next I set forth my understanding of Nixon’s thesis regarding the reaction to mortal knowledge and concomitant construction of sacred myth, in the emergence of consciousness, and critique this thesis. I then offer an alternative explanation for the emergence of consciousness, in which the construction of predictive narrative is selected “for”. I conclude my commentary with an alternative explanation of the emergence of, and significance of, Nixon’s existential crisis of mortal knowledge, by repositioning its emergence from beginnings, 150,000 years ago, to cultural developments that occurred as recently as 10,000 years ago. Key Words: myth, mind, consciousness experience, mortal knowledge. In his articles, “Hollows of Experience” and “Myth and Mind” Greg Nixon (2010a, 2010b) offers us an elegant and thought provoking narrative explanation for the emergence of human consciousness. In terms of his fundamental vision of the nature of consciousness, Nixon and I are largely in agreement. 1. Agreement First, Nixon and I agree that for the purposes of this discussion, consciousness is most usefully defined in terms of actively reflexive, self aware and self-referential knowing that is, to the best of our knowledge, uniquely human. As such, consciousness is a qualitatively different phenomenon from the environmental “awareness” we impute to other living creatures as they go about behaving in the world. It is also different from the universal interactions we consciously observe between “things” going “all the way down”. Second, Nixon and I agree that the instrumentality of self-referential knowing is fundamentally a symbolic behavior and principally linguistic. In other words, without language, there can be no consciousness. Third, we agree that the nature of symbolic behavior, as opposed to sign behavior, entails the construction of explanatory narrative in which causal, and therefore temporal, relationships between experienced/observed events are imputed. These narrative structures constitute “meaning” and in the absence of meaning, there is no consciousness. Fourth, we agree that all that is experienced consciously is constructed by symbolic creatures in interaction with their environment and amongst themselves. In other words, the narratives by which conscious creatures construct meaning that is shared and handed down in a cultural context, is an ongoing and emergent process in which narrative undergoes continual transformation in the context of changing circumstance, experience, and ubiquitous variation. Correspondence: Capt. Marc Hersch, M.A, 3Sigma Systems, USA. E-mail: systems@3sigma.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 355 Fifth, we agree that in consciousness, symbolic creatures experience, behave, and act within the context of a self-created world of meaning in which they are inexorably immersed. As Nixon says, “Thus, although we, the human species, are but one species among innumerable others, we differ in kind, not degree. This quality is our symbolically enabled self-consciousness, the fortress of cultural identity that empowers but also imprisons awareness.” Finally, Nixon and I agree that the meaningful symbolic world in which we are immersed is, from the first moment of self-referential awareness, constructed as a mythic cloth, woven together in mythic narrative founded upon axiomatic belief. On the whole, Nixon and I agree that consciousness is best regarded as an irreducible process --- a behavioral constellation --- rather than some aspect of the creature that can be teased out from the whole and examined under a microscope. In these matters of agreement, Nixon argues powerfully and in the interest of brevity, I will refrain from restating or reworking them. Suitable definitions and explanations of the nature of symbolic behavior can be found in the body of his articles. Instead of retracing the basic groundwork upon which Nixon and I stand, which is in itself controversial, my intention is to comment upon his narrative of emergence and propose a somewhat different path by which to arrive at the same destination. 2. Nixon’s Thesis At the risk of oversimplifying, Nixon speculates that the path to consciousness entails a crisis in which the pre-conscious creature awakens to the awesome knowledge of its own mortality. In that crisis, he argues, the creature is compelled to construct a transcendent mythic-sacred narrative in order to cope with the shock and awe of this terrible knowledge. It is the sacred quality of this mythic construction that knits the raw material of pre-consciousness into the whole that is necessary for an awakening of the fully conscious being. “I conclude that prehumans underwent an existential crisis that could be resolved only by the discovery-creation of the larger realm of symbolic consciousness we call the sacred.” Nixon reasons that an anticipatory, psychological-emotional response to an awareness of personal mortality is the final straw that tips the scales toward an awakening by compelling the pre-conscious creature to “spontaneously” construct sacred myth. In doing so, he resorts, as he must, to numerous psychological causes. To list a few, “emotion”, “ego-complex”, “conscious” versus “unconscious” experience, pre-symbolic awe, fear, grief, and even psychedelic experience. Nixon says, But until such primordial actions as the above became anything more than emotional responses to the dimly conceived horror of killing other bloodletting creatures or the unnamed terror of realizing death comes to all who are born, something more was necessary to give these feelings form and even transmute them into the hope and awe that are the beginnings of religion and the creative encounter with the sacred. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 356 … It is only with myth in its first spontaneous stirring that we enter the realm of consciously apprehended experience, that is, experience made conscious through its transformation into metaphor and story, a transformation that required the corequisite transformation of facial, gestural, protolinguistic communication into the fully fledged self-referential system that earns the name ‘language’. Nixon goes on to explain that the ultimate emotional crisis triggers an awakening to consciousness. The life crisis that arises with the realisation that the struggle to survive is always doomed to failure can only be cataclysmic. And concludes that, … The self is founded with death at its core. 3. Critique In his pursuance of his thesis, Nixon includes most of the key elements necessary to explain the emergence of consciousness but inverts the flow of the process of emergence in a manner that confounds his explanation. He places the cart before the horse by invoking psychological cause --- “a life crisis” --- that can only come into being as a function of conscious experience. There can be no doubt the individual self-awareness of mortality is one of the great and terrible contradictions of conscious experience, but I contend that the crisis created by this knowledge is not causal, nor is it a formative event in the emergence of consciousness. To the contrary, I contend that the psychological impact of mortal knowledge is an epiphenomenon that had a late onset in the course of human experience. Nixon begins as I would, by asserting that there appears to exist in all living organisms an impetus to survive and reproduce. He says, …it seems likely that the intentions of any organism can never veer too far from its innate evolved instincts for survival, predominance, and reproduction. This starting point is axiomatic and tautological. Life is defined in terms of the “will” to survive and reproduce. Such counter-entropic, energetic behavior entails a costly uphill struggle and I offer no argument here as to why this behavior called “life” came into being. For the purposes of this discussion though, it is important to note the following problems with Nixon’s formative statement. • There is no basis for asserting that survival and reproductive behavior is “intentional” or “willful” in the absence of conscious awareness. • The attribution of survival and reproductive behavior to “any organism” (singular) is best credited to Spencer and his “Social Darwinism”. This idea is not well supported by observation. In many instances it is evident that individual survival is subordinated to the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 357 continuity of communities of organisms, both intra-species and inter-species. Indeed, it can be argued that such subordination is the rule rather than the exception when the biosphere is regarded as a whole. • The idea of “predominance”, which implies competitive intention and a will to dominance between individuals in species and/or between various species, is not born out by observation. For example, in every case of dominance behavior we must infer at least one case of submissive behavior. It is not necessary to regard the submissive behaver as the loser in a zero-sum game. It might be more useful to understand that both individuals and the community as a whole win in the process of contention. In the final analysis, it needs to be remembered that the interactions among and between various species have been determined by a selective process based on the random variation that takes place in the context of the entire constellation of physiological-behavioral differences that emerge among living organisms. There are no rules that determine what works at any given time, in any given place, and in any given ecological context. Among individuals and groups, competitive and cooperative behaviors, dominance and submission, are equally subject to selection pressures. Selection is the ultimate equal opportunity employer. Failure to understand this is the fallacy inherent in Social Darwinism. I suspect that Nixon understand these caveats, but the lack of rigor in his formative statement creates a slippery slope of psychological reduction by injecting individual will and competitive impulses before the fact of consciousness. In a more fateful pitfall, Nixon resorts to some rather common explanations of the basic structure of symbolic behavior, which he sets forth in terms of mechanistic “category naming” and “opposition”. He writes, The physical entity would still note which stimuli are threats, which are prey, which might be mating potential, and which matter not at all. These categorizations continue to be primal response categories without the need for conscious decision-making. However, … their categorizations remain emotionally based, as well. But, With the arrival of speaking hominids, a net was thrown over the world and the entire progress of knowledge within the human species can be seen as a measure of the increasingly fine weave of the strands of that net. With the act of naming, each category can be further reduced to other categories and so on. What we call knowledge is based in increasing conceptual complexification involving both sub-sensory reduction and super-sensory expansion. And, with respect to the self-contained nature of linguistic categorical structures… ….all terms of language are built from these “binary oppositions” that refer essentially to each other. The flaw in Nixon’s characterization of symbolic behavior is that it fails to explain WHY such categorization --- this “naming” process by which the world is populated with symbolic objects --ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 358 occurs. What is missing is the crucial concept of PREDICTION, which I contend, is the crux of the process by which consciousness was selected “for”. It is this omission that creates problems for the rest of Nixon’s analysis, in which he touches on all the right bases, but in the wrong order. 4. Predictive Behavior versus Predictive Action Let me focus on this idea of prediction and see where it takes us, using virtually all of Nixon’s ideas about the nature and problems of conscious behavior. Nixon states, For example, Eliade’s (1954) demonstration of the eternal recurrence of cosmic cycles of time certainly applies to the mythic mind in general, but it is unknown how a presymbolic culture could share or even conceive of such an idea. It may have observed the cycle of the seasons or changes in the moon but it could not measure them without a means to do so. Note: The idea of pre-symbolic “culture” cannot be supported. Culture is a product of conscious action. What Nixon misses with respect to what he calls “cosmic cycles” and I call “patterned events” is that there exists what might be called a genetic mind that in the process of natural selection, imbues organisms with both sensory “measurement” and predictive behavior. The rooster crows at the break of dawn and herds of mega-fauna migrate with the seasons. All organisms engage in predictive behavior, but in the absence of consciousness, that behavior is genetically engrained rather than intentional. It is selected FOR in the Darwinian sense. Every living species conducts its affairs --- survival and reproduction --- in its own uniquely selected fashion in the context of the world with which it interacts by way of its physical characteristics, sensual faculties, and behaviors. We can think of the characteristics of a species as its bandwidth, in which the organism experiences and behaves. For example, some organisms live in an olfactory band, others in a principally auditory band, and still others in a bandwidth that is principally visual. Given an organism’s bandwidth, its genetically determined behaviors come to be more or less predictively synchronized with the patterned events that occur and reoccur, within some range of variability, in its environment. If these patterned events are stable enough in relation to the organism’s behavioral repertoire, that organism will survive long enough to reproduce others of its kind. Should the patterned events in the environment change suddenly, the repertoire of predictive behaviors built into the organism may cease to provide a survival advantage, thus jeopardizing the organism’s survival. Again, in the case of non-conscious behavior, every organism must of necessity, have built into its genetically determined behavioral repertoire, predictions that have been selected for on the basis of patterned events that actually take place repeatedly in its environment, and this behavioral repertoire will be passed on to subsequent generations. On this basis, we can state that all living organisms behave in a manner that anticipates events, (i.e. prediction), and that the nature of the patterns that allow for such prediction is entirely dependent on the bandwidth of the organism in question. Given its physiological characteristics, the organism’s survival is entirely dependent on its BEHAVIOR IN RELATION TO patterned events in its environment. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 359 We have a tendency to view the process of evolution in morphological terms rather than behavioral terms, yet morphology can be aptly viewed as nothing more than an instrument of behavior that, at its most fundamental level, involves survival and reproduction, and it is from the standpoint of the predictive nature of all living behavior, that we must address the emergence of consciousness. So far, I have painted a picture of predictive behavior in terms of genetic hardwiring, but this is not to say that within the behavioral repertoire of various living organisms, we do not observe varying degrees of behavioral latitude. In selecting for optimal behavioral constellations, natural selection seems to vacillate between the principle of simplicity, such as that observed in the robust hardwiring and rapid generational turnover of microorganisms and insects, and the more vulnerable complexity of long-lived behavioral polymorphs. In the first case, the instability of worldly patterned events --change --- is addressed by low-cost rapid reproductive turnover and slapdash random genetic variation. In the second case, the instability of worldly patterned events is addressed by increasingly flexible behavioral constellations realized at a considerably higher cost to the species and its members. Clearly, when taken as a whole, we conscious beings, possessors of the most complex, flexible, and expensive, behavioral constellation, have a vested interest in the latter path to survival and reproduction, but given the open-endedness of time, we can only say that time will tell which approach is superior. In any event, consciousness is what we have to work with, so I’ll move on and see how we might come to terms with it. We can now take a great leap forward to the point where, after eons of variation and selection amid changing worldly patterns, hominids make their appearance. These non-conscious apelike creatures are monuments to behavioral flexibility. Having recently, in evolutionary terms, descended from the trees to the savannah, they live in cooperative troops. There is a rough division of labor between the genders. They care for their young, who are by comparison with other mammals, slow to reach independent adulthood. Individuals are further stratified in terms of dominance tests that shape reproductive rights and produce the relations of leadership and followership that are essential to coordinated collaborative action. They have acquired an elaborate set of signs by which they signal coordinated behavior to address threat, defend, attack, etc. Their behavioral constellation entails levels of interdependence so complex that any individual can only survive as a member of, and in relation to, the troop as a whole. To be born and left alone or to be exiled from the troop would be tantamount to a death sentence. The whole of this genetically determined predictive behavioral repertoire, which enjoys the advantage of flexibility in both the social and individual behavioral domains ---this interactive dance --, has been carved out over generations of variation and natural selection. Though it is still neither intentional nor willful, it works. Given this flexible and highly social creature, we find ourselves by happenstance, at the threshold of consciousness. Let’s consider just a few of the many concomitant conditions that had to occur to set the stage for a leap to consciousness. • Having descended from the trees, bipedal locomotion that frees the hands for manipulative activity was selectively favored. • Bipedal locomotion that permitted migration (nomadic) of the troop from an area of depleted opportunity to areas of greater opportunity, was favored. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 360 • Vocal apparatuses used for increasingly complex coordinating sign behavior, was selectively favored. • Complex neurological faculties, (e.g. convoluted brains) used to manage increasingly complex group interactions, were selectively favored. • Slow infant development needed to incorporate the young into the complex interacting group, was selectively favored. • Living in a tightly knit, interdependent nomadic troop that functions as a whole that is greater than any single part, was selectively favored. This list can be elaborated ad nauseam, if only because it is the whole creature, in every imaginable aspect of physiology and behavior, that sets the conditions for what comes into being next. Subtract any element from that whole, or change the environmental conditions in which the creature behaves, and something else that we cannot predict, happens. Now we must set the whole creature in motion to understand how conscious behavior emerges in terms of advantage based on enhanced powers of prediction. As I have discussed, the troop’s behavior, as flexible as it is, is like that of other organisms --- rooted in its genetically programmed predictive behavior. That programmed behavior already engenders a great deal of adaptive latitude, but it is not yet conscious in Nixon’s and my sense of the term. The change begins when the predictive behaviors that reflect the interactions between the creature and its environment become turned inward amongst the group itself. Given the preconditions discussed above, the patterns of behavior among the members of the troop increasingly become focused, upon the troop as a whole, and upon individual members of the troop. This predicting of the behavior of others is founded in the patterned and rhythmic behavior of the troop and among its members. I have heard it suggested that the rhythmically plodding steps of nomadic wandering might have been one of the formative triggers for the genesis of a protointersubjectivity. In any event, it is by focusing on the troop’s collaborative behavioral rhythms --that predictive mindfulness rises above the creature’s predictive genes. Maybe there occurred a signing behavior of tapping out a cadence to coordinate the timing in a hunt. And maybe that tapping was repeated out of context, in a manner we describe now as drumming. And maybe that drumming behavior called forth the first intersubjective “shave and a haircut”, beginning with the predictive call --- tap, tapa tap tap --- and the predictive response --- tap tap. Whatever the specific triggering behavior(s) were, the transformative leap from sign to symbol and reaction to action, engendered a qualitative shift from sign-reaction to the symbolic process of predictive intersubjective call-response interaction between now-conscious beings. It is the call and the response, in which the response in turn, becomes a call itself, that marks the emergence of the intersubjective conscious creature. Awakening to consciousness entails a leap to meaningful language, and language behavior involves, at its root, patterned, predictive, mutuality. Signs and signals move one way only. It is the call and the predicable response that connects these creatures intersubjectively, in mind and in body. 5. The Infant’s New Mind ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 361 It is difficult to imagine the exact context in which the transformation occurred among our ancestors, but we can see the process at work in child development. We are all familiar with the idea that in embryologic development, we see much of evolutionary development mirrored in the development of the embryo --- gills and the like. In this same fashion, we can see in the development of the child, the various stages by which consciousness emerges in microcosm. The newborn infant is not conscious, though from a genetic standpoint, it is both equipped and predisposed to acquire consciousness. At first the infant is entirely focused and reactively dependent on its mother. The mother, who is both programmed and conscious, calls forth the consciousness of the infant, and pop-psychology notwithstanding, is genetically compelled to perform the behaviors necessary accomplish this calling-forth. This maternal calling forth process begins with rhythmic rocking. Maybe this is a substitute for the rhythmic cadence of early humans’ nomadic trekking. Nevertheless, rhythmic rocking is a necessary first step toward consciousness. In the absence of some form of rhythmic stimulation, the newborn infant child is on a road to ruin. As the infant matures, the mother engages in rhythmic vocalizations that are the immediate precursors to language. These include cooing, repetitious phrases, and singing. Still later, the mother begins to conduct numerous predictive games. Peek-a-boo is almost universal in this regard. “Now you see me. Now you don’t. Here I am!” The child is genetically predisposed to be enthralled by this game in much the same way that a young bird-chick is predisposed to “practice” flying. As the child is increasingly immersed in rhythms and predictive play, the mother begins to call forth the world by naming others in relation and worldly objects in relation. The sound “daddy” begets affection (we hope), the jack-in-the-box pops out when the weasel goes “pop”. Adorations and praise follow upon the heels of first words and correct predictions. And so the child is awakened to a symbolic world of theory in which the meaning of things is engendered in cause and effect relationships --- reliably and predictably. To place this picture of the process of emergence of consciousness in microcosm in the context of Nixon’s crisis of mortal knowledge, we might ask ourselves how the very same crisis awareness emerges in human development. Since I have not come across any academic literature that correlates anticipatory death terror with developmental age, I can only speculate. It seems to me that the terror engendered by the anticipation of one’s eventual death develops quite slowly over the course of a lifetime. In the consciousness of young children, the inevitability of death is usually addressed in curiosity and incomprehension. When will I die and how long will I live? How long is that? What might it feel like? Like sleeping? Later comes the familiar fearless and altruistic fantasies and acting-out of pre-pubescence. In adolescence and early adulthood, the prevailing consciousness engenders a sense of invincibility that is universally recognized as producing good soldiers. It is in the consciousness of old age that the terror of our inevitable death becomes fully realized. I can only wonder, was the consciousness emergent among our hominid precursors more like that of the young or the old? Common sense tells us that the child acquires the name for things, categorizes them and thereafter, organizes them into predictive theoretical relationships. As difficult as it may be to grasp this idea, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 362 the situation is actually the opposite. The child experiences everything in relation --- in predictive interaction with the world --- and names things in order to clothe relation with symbolic objects (objectification). In this process, the child undergoes a transformation from a behaving creature that reacts to the world to a predictive intentional actor who acts upon the world. We see that theory (as prediction) precedes data. It is all relation in prediction and there can be no data and no “things” without theory. The narrative begins in theory and is fleshed out with data. The narrative of relation that Nixon describes as mythical is indeed sacred, because it transcends the data points. It binds the whole together as sensible and meaningful. The infant, first awakened, comes forth in consciousness with a Weltanschauung that renders the whole world sensible and meaningful. That theory, which embraces everything, will become transformed again and again in a lifetime of symbolic revolutions instigated by predictive anomalies revealed in ongoing interactive relations with others and in relation with the world. In this process of “learning”, better called “knowledge creation”, the circle of conscious, active experience widens from interdependence with significant others, to becoming a player among the tribe of generalized others, to becoming a self that is instrumental in relation to other instrumental selves. The fuzzy self resolves into eversharpening focus. Horizons grow broader. The data proliferates. The narrative is extended. Elaboration is the rule, and in any individual’s lifetime, paradigmatic shifts are rarities of apocalyptic proportions. 6. The Tribal-Centric Mind In turning back to our ancestral troop of wandering hominids, we can accept that, unlike the infant’s awakening over a period of three to five years, the embryonic development of consciousness among these wandering apes took many generations, but the process of awakening was the same. Consciousness was first realized in relation to the group as a whole, and this marks the transformation of the troop to tribe. The tribal being was founded in the rhythms and patterns of day-to-day life. The individual may have been self-aware, but in a dimmer sense than we rugged individualists experience today. He and she were immersed in, and entirely dependent upon, the tribe as a whole. Individual relation was bound into the tribal relation with the world and the ongoing challenges presented by that world. Individuals did not act individually. All was call and response --all was RESPONSE--ABILITY. Every enterprise was a collaboration guided by the shared aims that represented the foundation of tribal-centric conscious intention. This does not mean that individuals did not come into conflict with one another. This was no utopia. In the course of enterprising action, in purpose and by happenstance, an individual might obstruct another’s intentional action. The synchronization of mutual action is momentarily interrupted in crossed purposes. A drummer changes up the timing. Mutual prediction fails. The failure is noted and the anomaly is reconciled on the basis of culturally defined norms and in innovative revision of narrative. The beat and cadence must be reestablished. The integrity and continuity of the tribe stands paramount. Survival hangs in the balance. The beat goes on. As was mentioned in the discussion of child development, and as Nixon asserts, language as a theoretic construct, is emergent as a whole. There is a tribal Weltanschauung that is embodied in its narrative that is populated with those worldly events and objects that are relevant to the tribe and those artifacts of tribal industry that RE-present the tribal identity. This is the ever-emergent tribal culture that constitutes the tribal bandwidth realized not just in physical/behavioral relations as before, but now in self-constructed conscious relation that overlays it all. The data points that populate the symbolic linguistic whole are elaborated and refined over time, but the overall tribal ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 363 worldview --- the narrative relation --- can only be overthrown in revolutionary conflict spawned by overwhelming anomaly. In tribal consciousness, the problems of personal mortality are of no great consequence. The tribe is the world, now, in the past, and in the future. The individual was born of the tribe and will continue as the tribe, so long as there is the tribe. We may call this a sacred awareness, but to the tribe there is no distinction between sacred and non-sacred. The world is whole and, in sacred relation, the tribal narrative encompasses that world. The tribe’s mythic narrative is a “theory of everything”. 7. Shock and Awe In contrast to Nixon’s mortal knowledge thesis, I have asserted that conscious emerges from rhythmic call and response behavior spawned from complex sign behavior, and that call and response is perpetuated and elaborated in language behavior in ongoing intersubjective inter— ACTION. The faculty of symbolic interaction (language behavior) enables the construction of a shared predictive/theoretical narrative --- a socially constructed reality --- that functions to produce coordinated, collaborative, intentional (meaningful), and innovative, action among members of the fundamentally the eusocial human species. Central to Nixon’s problem is that he invokes an essentially emotional response --- a shock and awe -- with respect to mortal knowledge. He can only support this by resorting to a categorization of emotional experience. Nixon says, We consciously experience all emotions, especially the “higher” ones, through the lens of linguistic interpretation; even the basal emotions most often become transfigured or transmogrified through cultural experience. Nixon is forced to create a hierarchy of “basal” to “higher” emotions and suggests that basal emotions are “transfigured” by cultural experience. It is more useful to think of emotional experience as a function of consciousness. We interpret what we observe in the behavior of non-symbolic mega-fauna as emotional, but this is an error of anthropomorphism. Feeling and emotion are not one in the same. “Arousal/placidity and fight or flight” as well as pain and the feelings of threat and disorientation that occur upon the loss of a nurturing parent, are not emotions, basal or otherwise. They are genetically programmed behavioral responses honed over the millennia by the process of natural selection. Humans also possess these genetically programmed feeling responses, but it is not until the awakening to consciousness that they become “transmogrified” into the emotional. Non-symbolic creatures do not anticipate death and therefore, cannot fear it. The symbolic concept of death, in the context of theoretic-relational narrative, must become reified before it can be felt as feared. This process of reification is the symbolic aspect that differentiates emotional experience from genetically programmed feeling experience. Having confounded the concept of emotion, Nixon writes about “emotionally-based” knowledge and the ushering in of “theoretic culture”. However, emotionally-based “knowledge” is the defining factor of what Donald (1991) labels as mythic culture, the first cultural stage of humanity after language acquisition but before mass written ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 364 literacy. Such literacy — with the addition of the experimental method and logical skepticism — ushers in theoretic culture. The latter is apparently where we are now, but it must be pointed out that mythic thinking is still rife amongst us, especially when we use concepts for metaphysical ideas or experiences that have no referents in the real world before It is more useful to discard Nixon’s distinctions. Once the predictive mind is awakened, the admixture that is genetic and symbolic is irreducibly present in the experience and knowing of all conscious creatures, including those who practice the disciplines of experimental method and logical skepticism. It is not helpful to suggest that there is a mythic mind that stands in opposition to a theoretic mind. The mythic narrative is theoretic and the theoretic is mythic. As in the case of the infant that awakens to consciousness, the world of which we are conscious, in relation, is whole. The mythic mind and logical mind, emergent in interaction are not only inseparable; they are one in the same in the symbolic process of narrative that is creatively populated with worldly “facts” in temporal-causal relation. Earlier I suggested a set of preconditions that set the stage for an awakening to consciousness. The conditions allowed for a transition from genetically programmed predictive behavior to socially constructed predictive action that was rooted in rhythmic relations among members of troopsbecome-tribes. The explanation I propose drives the awakening in terms of selective pressures that favor increasingly efficacious prediction. Nixon also speculates as to the conditions that might account for an awakening, but uses a different approach. He suggests that bipedalism is necessary but not qualitatively different from other adaptive events. Tools, he suggests, are not clearly and exclusively characteristic of conscious beings. The mastery of fire, he says, seems to represent a definitive milestone. With this accomplishment — and it was an accomplishment — humankind irrevocably distinguished itself from all other animals. Yet fire itself must have been a very familiar and unremarkable phenomenon to all living creatures and selection surely favored those that could turn this common event to their advantage by way of their genetic programming and, for the conscious, symbolic constructions. Nixon argues, again from the psychological, that the characteristics of fire inspire a mystical awakening. I would suggest that in consciousness, the ethereal nature of fire may very well fan the flames of the imagination, but its magical powers were on par with the other forces of nature that came to populate the mythic narrative that constituted emerging consciousness. Nixon writes, There are few sacred rituals that did not involve fire in some form… I would suggest that it was not the fire that kindled the mind but rather the drumming and dancing around the fire that kindled the imaginative mystical reverence for fire. Moving forward toward the death crisis, Nixon interprets Giegerich, saying, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 365 …early hunting with weapons was ‘unnatural’ for our ancestors, no matter what species they may have been. The act was a decisive break with nature whose importance became underlined when human culture became more settled with pastoral or agricultural pursuits and still found the need for blood sacrifices to reawaken the shock of death. And, The life crisis that arises with the realisation that the struggle to survive is always doomed to failure can only be cataclysmic. And in addressing the problem of an emotional response to death awareness as a trigger to conscious awakening, …this existential crisis was concomitant upon the also dawning awareness of oneself as a unique experiencing entity. He concludes, Egocentric consciousness is the polarity of death consciousness, each inside the other: The self is founded with death at its core. I do not find Nixon’s thesis regarding egocentric awareness of mortality either necessary or compelling. As I have explained, the emergence of tribal-centric consciousness in which the individual self is fully realized is not only consistent with a definition of consciousness, but it is the essence of consciousness that, Nixon and I agree, emerges in symbolic interaction among eusocial creatures. The immersion of the self in relation to a larger causal narrative that embodies tribal identity, takes precedence and this remains true today in the emergence of consciousness that can be observed in child development. If I am correct in suggesting that Nixon’s crisis of mortal knowledge is an epiphenomenon of conscious rather than causal or even concomitant with the emergence of consciousness, and that the awareness of mortal knowledge was not a fearsome prospect to tribal-centric conscious beings, how might we explain the emotional angst that consciousness inspires in ourselves? To begin, I would like to suggest that IF mortal knowledge constituted a conscious-generating existential crisis as explained by Nixon, it unlikely that the faculty of consciousness would have survived the challenges of the evolutionary selection process. Mythic-sacred narrative and shamanic ritual notwithstanding, egocentric reflection and the fear thus engendered, would have undermined tribal action to a debilitating degree. What was the suicide rate among our earliest conscious ancestors? It is more reasonable to speculate that the self that was called forth to consciousness by the tribe, was so embedded in mythic relation to the whole of the tribe, that individual mortality was writ into consciousness and mythic narrative in a fashion that engendered the ongoing continuity of self in the same sense that the tribe itself was ongoing and self-renewing. The experience of the individual as ongoing was not an intellectual rationalization. It was a lived reality. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 366 But this argument doesn’t answer the question of how the reification of the concept of death produces the anticipatory-predictive, emotional terror we know today. Previously, I discussed the behavioral and physiological conditions that set the stage for the emergence of consciousness. Salient among these was a nomadic lifestyle that enhanced opportunity and provided the rhythmic template for intersubjective experience. Exact numbers are not necessary, but conservatively speaking, we can place the emergence of the symbolic, language-using, Homo sapiens at around 150,000 years ago. When regarded as a whole, their physiology, flexible sociality, predictive powers, and nomadic lifestyle, enabled them to take advantage of an increasingly broad territorial range, resulting in their spread across the planet. Thus far the behavioral constellation of the species Homo sapiens --- eusocial, nomadic, intersubjective, predictive --- represents a relatively short-lived evolutionary experiment. Over a period of about 140,000 years, their behavioral constellation remained relatively constant. As populations increased beyond tribal carrying capacity that was bounded by the constraints of nomadic movement, hunting and foraging technologies, and member socialization and enculturation processes, new tribe tribes were spawned and migrated along ecological fall-lines to eventually encircle the planet. For 140,000 years, the success formula of Homo sapiens produced an explosive increase in range rather than numbers. The quest for territory needed to sustain each newly emergent nomadic, hunting-gathering tribe created a pressure that favored range over numbers, yet success inevitably produces the seeds of its own failure. Estimates vary regarding the beginnings of the cultural transformation from a nomadic to agrarian, location-dependent, lifestyle, ranging from 10,000 years ago in the Americas to about 5,000 years ago in the Mesopotamian region. This transformation must be regarded as revolutionary (cultural) rather than evolutionary (genetic). Given certain conditions such as location, soils, weather and range limits, among others, some tribes, in their flexible and innovative symbolic, tribal-centric consciousness, were able to more efficiently exploit local resources and thus increase the carrying capacity of their particular niche. This revolution in lifestyle, from nomadic to location-dependence, transformed the modes of relation from those of tribal interdependence in which self-identify was bound into relation with others, to tribal dependence on land and tools that spawned a self-centered, object-centric, identity. In other words, the symbolic reality --- the self constructed mythic narrative --- became transformed from intersubjective call and response relation to relation with THINGS that are incapable of response, but nonetheless, imbued with socially constructed meaning. Although we can never shed our call and response roots, from this point forward the process by which intersubjective relation begets objective relation increases at an increasing rate. The definition of “success” must always include an answer the question, by what measure? The 140,000-year experiment with tribal-centric consciousness produced a stunningly rapid expansion of range for Homo sapiens. The most recent 10,000 year experiment in which object-centric consciousness, a cultural product realized in intersubjective relation, produces increasing economic efficiencies at an exponentially increasing rate, has resulted in a stunningly rapid expansion of population. While the jury is still out with respect to tribal-centric consciousness, the evidence hasn’t even been fully heard with respect to object-centric consciousness. So what shall we say about Nixon’s crisis of mortal knowledge? ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 367 In the tribal-centric reality that was predominantly intersubjective, the call and response rhythms of everyday experience produced an ongoing process, without beginnings or ends. In the mythic narrative of the aboriginal peoples of Australia this is rendered by observers today as, “The Songlines”, in which the “human beings” are continually calling-forth the world in song (rhythmic sacred narrative). We might ask if tribal-centric people --- “The People” --- were fully conscious in the sense put forth in Nixon’s articles and in this commentary. I would answer that these tribal beings were not only fully conscious, but in some ways, were even more fully conscious than those I have called here, the object-centric knowers, who emerged from tribal-centric peoples a mere 10,000 years ago. The object-centered people have realized remarkable achievements in their pursuance of material wellbeing. The impetus toward such material achievement is rooted in the axiomatic drive to survive and reproduce, and has been realized in the increasingly efficient exploitation of the faculty of consciousness. Excess productive capacity and the resulting accumulation of material wealth, provided a compellingly attractive survival buffer that could not be realized in nomadic, tribal-centric, relation. On the other hand, increasingly object-centric relations produced a reality in which unresponse-ABLE “things” have beginnings and ends and can be gained and lost. Call and response relations become focused, not on the collaborartive process of surviving, but upon the accumulation of a reservoir of things whose numbers can be “accounted” for in terms of wealth. From a developmental standpoint, tribal-centric and object-centric consciousness, emerge along the same path. We are all called forth by the tribe, and in intersubjective symbolic interaction, we all become actors in the call and response dance. But in the object-centered culture, constructed in mythic narrative, the world of relation is transformed into a world made up of objective, means-toends instrumentalities. In a process of increasingly abstracted reification, even the conceptual takes on the symbolic qualities of thingness --- physically and temporally bounded, intentionally caused, and defined in terms of intrinsic instrumental value (ideology). Most important among these constructed “things” is the self that is physically and temporally bounded, caused, and instrumental. The terror inspired by the anticipation-prediction of the loss of the thing called “I”, only emerges in the context of “I” as “thing”, and this does not occur until the object-centric mythic narrative emerges in the context of a sedentary, property-centered, object-oriented, lifestyle. There can be no doubt that individuals among nomadic, tribal-centric people, experienced feelings of fear when confronted with the prospect of personal annihilation, and as a general rule, behaved with the intention to postpone that event as long as possible. Such feelings of fear and accompanying physiological responses are built into all organisms. There can also be little doubt that Homo sapiens shares with other complex organisms, the genetic predisposition to subordinate their individual survival to the survival of their progeny. But in socially constructed tribal-centric consciousness, it was the threat to the continuity of the tribe that provoked anticipatory mortal terror, because it was the tribe, as a lived reality, that was the principal wellspring of selfhood and the guarantor of the survival of individuals and their progeny. 8. The Jury is Still Out Homo sapiens emerged as a conscious creature in the context of a particular set of happenstance circumstances in a particular time and place. The faculty of consciousness by which the existentially experienced came to be overlaid by a socially constructed, symbolic and temporally predictive narrative in the context of patterns bounded by the creature’s sensorial bandwidth, emerged from ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 354-368 Hersch, M. The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge 368 rhythmic, intersubjective mutuality that transformed sign behavior into predictive, call and response behavior. For at least 140,000 years, consciousness was essentially tribal-centric. In all respects, the individual’s lived experience was immersed in and supported by a mythic-sacred narrative of tribal identity that was constructed, renewed, and continually transformed in the context of their nomadic lifestyle. Beginning a mere 10,000 years ago, opportunistic conditions and conscious behavior converged to permit some tribes to cease their wandering ways and establish permanent residence upon some lands. In the context of this new lifestyle, there occurred a symbolic narrative revolution in which intersubjective tribal call and response relation took a backseat to relations of “objective” property. This new lifestyle gave rise to the construction of an object-centric mythic narrative in which the individual became one of many bounded worldly objects defined in terms of opposition. The objectcentric creature lives within the tribal-centric creature that lives within the genetically shaped creature. These forces, acting as a whole in the context of the world here and now, constitute the conscious creature we currently call “us”. How are we doing? Only time will tell. References Nixon,G. M. (2010a) Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-287. Nixon,G. M. (2010b) Myth and mind: the origin of human consciousness in the discovery of the sacred. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 289-337. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 369-371 Jarvilehto, T. Consciousness as Shared and Categorized Result of Experience 369 Commentary Consciousness as Shared and Categorized Result of Experience Tim Jarvilehto* ABSTRACT I very much second the basic tenets of Nixon as to separating the concepts of experience and consciousness. However, I see the relation of these terms in a somewhat different way: experience is the general basis of our existence, a process in the organism-environment system, whereas consciousness is based on shared results of the experience, and categorized by language. Everything that is not realized in shared results of experience stays nonconscious, and does not exist for the subject, although its effects may be seen in his actions, as Greg Nixon quite correctly remarks. Key Words: consciousness, experience, categorized result. I think Greg Nixon (Nixon, 2010) is quite on the right track when trying to clarify the relation between unconscious and conscious experience. It is true that these concepts are usually used (if used at all) in a very opaque way, especially in constructivism and cognitive brain research. In the former, it is often unclear (at least to me) if reality is seen only as a result of construction of conscious experience, nonconscious processing playing no role. In the latter, the processing in the brain is endowed with some magical powers that make some of the brain processes conscious, whereas the rest of these processes stay at the nonconscious level. I completely agree with Nixon that the terms “experience” and “consciousness” are not interchangeable, but my reasons may be a little different than those proposed by Nixon. According to the organism-environment system theory (Järvilehto, 2000; Jarvilehto 2009), consciousness appeared as a new kind of organization of organism-environment systems, as an aspect of the social organization based on cooperation of individual systems for shared or common results. Thus, contrary to traditional or common sense explanations, consciousness is not considered as something private, but it is rather characteristic of the structure of the cooperative system directed towards common results. It seems this conclusion is quite aligned with Nixon’s ideas. In the framework of the organism-environment theory the criterion for consciousness is the possibility of report, that of communicating and indicating common results. However, with words we can never describe an action, but only common results. If I want to tell what happens when I take a pencil from the table, I must divide my action into subresults: my hand is now here, I move it, at the next moment it is there, I grip the pencil, etc. If I am further asked what I mean by "move" or "grip", I must again go to the subresults and say, for example, that moving means the hand is now here, but at the next moment there. We have no words for the action itself, and, in principle, we cannot have this, if consciousness is related only to the results of action. In fact, each verb is an abbreviation of a sequence of results. From this it follows that we can be conscious only of common results, of something that we share with other people. Consciousness, thus, is basically non-continuous, and based on a continuous life process, most of which stays non-conscious for us. However, language offers the possibility of a theory of action for explanation and understanding of one’s own behavior. Language makes possible Correspondence: Tim Jarvilehto, PhD, Prof. of Psychology, Kajaani Univ. Consortium, Univ. of Oulu, Finland E-mail: timo.jarvilehto@oulu.fi ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 369-371 Jarvilehto, T. Consciousness as Shared and Categorized Result of Experience 370 the existence of the past and the future in the present, because with the help of language we may reflect on what happened and what will be happening. This is the basis for our impression that consciousness is continuous and that we can use language for the description of the actual processes. Although words are for cooperation and for the achievement of common results, the common results are something that may never be exhaustively described by words. Speech and language are only tools for creating the organization leading to the common results. A word is an "interpretation" in the sense that it refers to an indicator of results. For example, the word "ship" denotes a piece of reality (thing) which is an indicator of the result (e.g. the possibility to go overseas). The word is a human interpretation of a piece of reality. For an ant that part of the world would not be a ship, but something else (of which we will never have exact knowledge, because we cannot share it with the ant). The identification of the indicator of result with the result itself means the stopping of development, limiting oneself to what is visible. The organism-environment theory states that the parts of environment belonging to the organismenvironment system are parts defined by the structure of the system: "Physical description of a living system can never be a complete description, not only because physics has nothing to say about life as such, but also because the parts of the system are not selected according to the physical laws, but on the basis of the living structure" (Jarvilehto, 2000). Thus, when we describe the environment of an animal, we do not really describe the parts belonging to the living system. We describe these parts as separated from the system and joined to the system of the observer. Therefore, we cannot observe the "Umwelt" of the animal (cf. v. Uexküll and Kriszat, 1932); we may describe only our own Umwelt and relate this to the body of the animal. When observing the behavior of the animal, we may then see how the animal relates to such parts of the environment, which, in fact, belong to our own system. This consideration may be developed even further. When we give a description of our own environment, we do not really describe those environmental parts belonging to the organismenvironment system. Instead, we give the description of certain parts of the world from the point of view of the human species as a whole, because the consciously described human environment is a shared environment. All conscious things are common; therefore the whole human world, as it may be described, is a social world. All conscious experiences are common experiences. When I say something about my environment, then it is no longer my private environment, i.e. that which belongs to my specific organism-environment system. It is a shared "third person" view of my experience. The environment cannot be extracted from the organism-environment system and be described as if "from inside." The human being cannot describe anything that is completely private, because the contents of his consciousness are common, shared with other people. This means also that we never have conscious knowledge of our environment so far it is regarded as belonging to the organism-environment system; we know it consciously only through the results of our actions. I think this would pretty much correspond to “Erfahrung”, as discussed by Nixon. We do not consciously know how we are connected to the world, because we act in the world as organism-environment systems. As conscious beings we may at any moment separate some parts of the world as objects of our activity, and these parts are as results of the perceptual experience shared with other people. When we describe these parts, we use words as indicators of these results. Thus, the verbal description of a part of the world is only an indicator of the shared part, but not identical with it. Such a verbal description is good enough when we create co-operative organization for common results; it gives to the other human being the possibility to direct his activity to the part of the world in question, and to join it into his organism-environment system. The real part of the world involved in the cooperation is, however, always more than the verbal description reveals. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 369-371 Jarvilehto, T. Consciousness as Shared and Categorized Result of Experience 371 This fact manifests itself clearly in teaching of the skills. You may describe by words how to ride a bicycle, but this does not much help the person who wants to learn to ride. If you want to teach him you have to coach him by showing the motions and the ways to balance the bicycle. Finally, when the student learns to ride, no one really knows how it happened. From the point of view of the organism-environment system theory, this is understandable. As our consciousness is related only to the result, we can consciously deal with, and verbally report, only sequences of results, not the processes as such. Thus, we can learn how to throw a ball, if we first consciously listen to the instructions of the teacher (put the hand like this, press the ball, move the hand, release the ball), and follow the described sequence of results. Then, in the process of repeating the intermediate results, our functional organization is changed such that we do no longer pay attention to the single phases of the action. When mastering the task, our behavior is directed from the beginning directly towards the intended goal. We now can throw the ball, but we don't know how it happens, because the process itself is nonconscious. Summarizing, I very much second the basic tenets of Nixon as to separating the concepts of experience and consciousness. However, I see the relation of these terms in a somewhat different way: experience is the general basis of our existence, a process in the organism-environment system, whereas consciousness is based on shared results of the experience, and categorized by language. Everything that is not realized in shared results of experience stays nonconscious, and does not exist for the subject, although its effects may be seen in his actions, as Greg Nixon quite correctly remarks. References Jarvilehto, T. (2000). The theory of the organism-environment system: IV. The problem of mental activity and consciousness. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science, 35, 35-57. Jarvilehto, T. (2009) The theory of the organism-environment as basis for experimental work in psychology. Ecological Psychology, 21, 112-120. Nixon,G. (2010) From panexperientialism to individual self consciousness: The continuum of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 216-233. Uexküll, J. v., & Kriszat, G. (1932) Streifzüge durch die Umwelten von Tieren und Menschen. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 372-372 McCard, J. Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon’s Myth and Mind 372 Commentary Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon’s Myth and Mind Joseph McCard* ABSTRACT Nixon brings to our attention that consciousness changes and is of many kinds. Consciousness studies focus on only one kind of consciousness, ego consciousness also termed self-consciousness. Nixon's essay may cause some to re-think that issue. Key Words: myth, mind. Nixon (2010) writes, "By accepting that the formal structure of human language is the key to understanding the uniquity of human culture and consciousness...I am free to focus on the causes that led to such an unprecedented threshold crossing." (p291). We find similar conclusions about the varities of consciousness in other studies. In his book, 'The Discovery of the Mind', Bruno Snell investigates the structure of the literature of the writings of the Early Greeks, beginning with Homer. Snell says, 'European thinking begins with the Greeks...this type of thnking was an historical growth.' (p.v). and 'how radically the experience of Homer differs from our own.' Snell looks closely at early Greek literature and also concludes that language is a key to understanding human culture and consciousness, 'For the existence of the intellect and the soul are dependent upon man's awareness of himself.'(p.ix), for example. In 'Greece and the Hellenistic World' (Boardman et al) trace the same pathway of development through the artistic and sculptural creations of the early Greeks, culminating in the evidence of self-reflection found in the Kouros, 'Kritian Boy' (480 B.C.). Additionally, Charles Taylor, in, "The Dialogical Self", points out another change in consciousness, monological to dialogical consciousness. Snell, Boardman, and Taylor point out that human consciousness has changed. Our thinking and experience changes and is directly related to our various states of consciousness. In saying, "I conclude that pre-humans underwent an existential crisis that could be resolved only by the discovery-creation of the larger realm of symbolic consciousness we call the sacred." (p291), Nixon brings to our attention that consciousness changes and is of many kinds. Consciousness studies focus on only one kind of consciousness, ego consciousness also termed self-consciousness. Nixon's essay may cause some to re-think that issue. References Nixon,G. M. (2010) Myth and mind: the origin of human consciousness in the discovery of the sacred. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 289-337. Correspondence: Joseph McCard E-mail: joseph.mccard@att.net ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

1229 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | Page 1229-1234 Hersch, M. The Kingdom of Lies Book Review Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow: The Grand Design New York: Bantam Books, 2010, 208 pp. ISBN: 0553805371 The Kingdom of Lies Marc Hersch* ABSTRACT In their book, The Grand Design, Hawking and Mlodinow, faithful disciples of the scientific method, give an account of what they and their brethren in the physical sciences have discovered by following the evidence gleaned in systematic observation and measurement using the most advanced technologies available today. In their lifelong search as physicists, for the Holy Grail of a theory of everything — a Grand Design — the evidence it seems, has led them, not to a unified theory of everything, but to the heresy of all scientific heresies, a theory about theory making. Key Words: Grand Design, Stephen Hawking, Leonard Mlodinow, scientific method, physical science, Holy Grail, theory of everything. A Parable In the beginning the king was told that all the crops in the kingdom would be affected by a terrible blight. Anyone who ate of them would go mad. He called in his trusted adviser and asked him what to do. “Of course,” the king said, “there is enough grain left from last year’s harvest so that you and I could continue eating of it. We could remain sane and keep all the others from doing any harm.” ”Your majesty,” replied the wise man, “if only you and I are sane and all the rest are madmen, who is it that will be locked up in the asylum?” ”I understand,” said the king, “but what is left for us to do?” “The best we can do”, replied the sage, “is for both of us to eat the same grain as everyone else but before we do I will place a mark on your forehead, and you will place one on mine, so that whenever we look at each other we will be reminded the we are also mad.” (As told to Arthur Green by Rabbi Nahman of Braqtslav) In the human enterprise we accept that prediction is possible and it is by the device of our predictive stories — our theories — that we have prevailed as a species. In everyday experience our stories concern themselves with mundane matters of prediction: A red sky at night is a sailor’s delight. The slowest cashier line in the market is always the one that I am in. The stock market went up today on news of lower housing prices. Vitamin supplements will Correspondence: Capt. Marc Hersch, M.A, 3Sigma Systems, USA. E-mail: systems@3sigma.com Note: This Book Review is edited by JCER Editor-at-Large Gregory M. Nixon. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1230 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | Page 1229-1234 Hersch, M. The Kingdom of Lies make me live longer. So goes our predictive storytelling in every moment of wakeful awareness as well as in our fitful dreams. In our never-ending quest for better prediction, we are driven to construct grander and grander stories that consolidate and reduce the number and complexity of the stories we must resort to in prediction. Given that prediction is the principal business of being human and that our survival depends on how well we do it, it is not surprising that throughout history, the human enterprise, in the grandest sense, has been to construct the ultimate story of all stories, the one true story that might confer upon us powers of perfect prediction — the story of The Grand Design. Hawking and Mlodinow speak to the storytelling process on p. 51 of their book. A theory (an explanatory model) is more “good” to the extent that it demonstrates sensual “elegance”, “is parsimonious in containing “few arbitrary or adjustable elements”, is comprehensive in “explaining all observations”, and “makes detailed predictions about the future” that can be tested in practical experience. Over the ages many storytellers have laid claim to the discovery of the codex of the Grand Design — the theory that explains everything. The stars, the bones of chickens, the lay of tea leaves, or the words of gods and God miraculously revealed are but a few of the stories that have been turned to our predictive purposes, but most have fallen by the wayside, having failed one or more of the tests of “good” storytelling. The Grand Design is a story about storytelling in which the evidence gleaned in systematic observation and measurement has led the disciples of science down a storied path of increasing elegance, parsimony, comprehensiveness, and verification in practice, to a story in which the final outcomes produced by their method of questioning may very well have brought them to a dead-end — full stop! In the early going the authors explain that our superstitious and metaphysical mythic stories placed us at the center of the universe with all the world revolving around our being and intentions, but over time the predictive power of models that displaced us from the center and relegated us to the status of mere participants in a law-abiding world “out there” did better at meeting the tests of story goodness: “The revolutionary idea that we are but ordinary inhabitants of the universe, not special beings distinguished by existing at its center, was first championed by Aristachuc…” (p. 21). This displacement theme, in which man’s existence is subordinated to externally determined laws, forms the foundation for the world narratives of both classical science and modern institutionalized religion. In other words, this modern worldview asserts a narrative in which there is a discoverable true world “out there” that obeys the laws of nature or the laws of nature decreed by gods or God, and that by decoding these external laws, perfect prediction becomes in principle at least, possible. In the popular press, much has been made of the idea that Hawking and Mlodinow are challenging religious thought, but the authors make it clear that this is not their aim. The authors say that they do not wish to concern themselves with the dividing line between religious stories and scientific stories, asserting that science cannot disprove the existence of God or gods. What scientific storytelling has managed to do, they say, is to tell a story in which the existence of the world we know does not “require: that there be a God or gods. A ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1231 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | Page 1229-1234 Hersch, M. The Kingdom of Lies story is a story, and it is not the truth of a story that gives it legs, but rather its elegance, parsimony, comprehensiveness, and predictive power.” The stories told in classical science, they explain, are a product of a method of story construction: “[M]ost scientist would say a law of nature is a rule that is based upon an observed regularity and provides predictions that go beyond the immediate situations upon which it is based” (p. 27). And furthermore, “[M]ost laws of nature exist as a part of a larger, interconnected system of laws” (p. 28). Unlike mythic and religious stories, the stories told using the scientific method of story construction must reflect self-consistent stories within stories. The authors credit Laplace with setting the gold standard of scientific storytelling, “…given the state of the universe at one time, a complete set of laws fully determines both the future and the past” (p. 28). In the scientific method of storytelling, the truth-value of the lawful stories constructed can be supported by an ever-increasing number of predictions confirmed in practice, such as the rising of the Sun in the East, but a single practical falsification of a scientific story is sufficient to render that story useless, such as the day on which the Sun rises in the West. According to the authors, the first shot across the bow of the ship of truth-seeking was fired by René Descartes, who asserted the relational understanding of the principle of initial conditions: “In order to apply the laws of physics, one must know how a system started off, or at least its state at some definite time. (One can also use the laws to follow a system backward in time.)” (p. 20) The authors might have better stated this in the following manner: In order to apply the rules proposed in any story, one must assert how the system starts off, or at least its state at some definite point in time. Every story must have a beginning, whether its initial condition be a mote in God’s eye or a Big Bang. It can be argued that the initial state for the story of scientific storytelling being told in The Grand Design begins with Sir Isaac Newton, a practical and God-fearing man who told a story of an interlocking mechanical universe that predicted the motions of things observed on earth and in the heavens, and a darn good story it was. Given the ability at the time of humans to observe and measure such things, his predictions were both useful and, for all intents and purposes, spot on! Given the efficacy of his story, Newton did not have to work very hard to convince others that his story, among all others of the day, was at long last the proof of a Grand Design in the mind of God. The age of prefect prediction, it seemed, was upon us. All that remained was to employ rigorous methods of observation, measurement and testing to discover the clockwork “laws” of nature decreed by God, and thus was born the story-telling method of what the authors of The Grand Design call, the “classical” physical sciences. “According to the traditional conception of the universe, objects move on well-defined paths and have definite histories. We can specify their precise position at each moment in time.” The disciples of the physical sciences fashioned themselves as a monastic sect, sworn to abide by the codices of the scientific method in their quest for perfect prediction. They adopted the self-consistent and therefore perfectly true language of mathematics as their lingua franca. It was by the example of Newton’s physics that all other scientific storytelling became fashioned. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1232 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | Page 1229-1234 Hersch, M. The Kingdom of Lies Amongst Newtonian storytellers the heretics of science came to be regarded as those who failed to heed the evidence of the senses revealed in observation and measurement. The nature of the true world, they claimed, can only be revealed if we eschew our beliefs and cleave to the empirical evidence. The history of scientific storytelling then, is the story told of following the evidence gleaned in observation and measurement conducted by ever more powerful technologies such as giant telescopes, electron microscopes, atom smashing accelerators, and brain scanners, and all was good in the quest for truth, until that is, those instruments of scientific observation began to produce evidence in which the creed of falsification itself became falsified. Say the authors of the Grand Design: “Although [the classical science] account is successful enough for everyday purposes, it was found in the 1920s that this "classical" picture could not account for the seemingly bizarre behavior observed on the atomic and scales of existence” So where has the latest evidence of our senses realized in natural selection and extended by technological means been leading in the search to discover the ultimate story — the grand design? The evidence of our senses, enhanced and extended, about the nature of things at the smallest and largest scales of experience, seems to conspire to frustrate our best scientific storytellers, forcing them to create bizarre twists and turns of plot in order to make sense of a seemingly endless stream of self-contradictory evidence. On the scale of small, when we try to determine if light behaves as a wave or as particles, the answer depends on how we look at it. The evidence of the wave falsifies the evidence of particles and the evidence of particles falsifies the evidence of waves. The truth of the matter is as slippery as a wet eel. When we try to determine the location and speed of a subatomic particle we find that the more we know about its location, the less we can know of its speed, and the more we know of its speed, the less we can know of its location. In the three dimensional space of our experience, one prediction precludes another. When we shoot molecular “Buckyballs” through a slit in a screen, they pile up on the other side, honest and true, unless there are two slits, in which case the piling up is falsified, and the Buckyballs line up like soldiers in rank and file and salute us. Then again, if we peek at one of two slits while shooting the Buckyballs, they lie to us again by piling up as if there were only one slit! The Buckyballs have caught us peeking! On the scale of the large, as we approach the speed of light, time and space are transformed in a lockstep that leads to the disappearance of both at Einstein’s storied terminal velocity, the “constant” speed of light. Location in space and time along with all causes and effects are gone, baby, gone! The very foundation of our stories told in pasts and futures are obliterated. The mathematics required to construct a story about the falsification of falsification, requires that the world we are observing not proceed along the familiar storylines of the causes and effects that mark our everyday experience in four dimensions. Randomness rules in time and space, if these places exist at all, and bounce around in 11 storied dimensions, and presumably more in some other version. Randomness rules save the evidence that some stories appear to be more probable than others and these probabilities can be practically calculated, say the authors, using the sum of all possible histories, called a Feynman sum. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1233 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | Page 1229-1234 Hersch, M. The Kingdom of Lies Now if the “probability amplitude” for one story, teased out from the mathematically calculated 10500 possible stories, can be singled out as greater than all the others, it would seem we are at least getting closer to fingering the story of everything we seek, but the evidence throws us still another curve ball. When we swing the bat this time, it turns out that the probabilities we calculate for a story we tell depends on what we chose to observe and how we observe it! “We create the evidence of our story by our observation rather than that story creating us” (p. 140). It does not matter which stories are actually more probable, if any can said to be so, because the story we experience as observers, however improbable, is always the one that results in us! If the best that we can do is construct the one story, top-down, that leads to us among a multitude of possible stories that lead to universes without us, then we are returned to the center of the universe, which is precisely where we began our journey as human beings in search of perfect prediction. The evidence, say Hawking and Mlodinow, is that there are no fixed laws of nature “out there”. The world that we can observe in knowing is dependent upon the models we use, and the models we can use are determined by the conditions that lead to the one world that allows for us, among on infinitude of possible worlds. We form mental concepts of our home, trees, other people, the electricity that flows from wall sockets, atoms, molecules, and other universes. These mental concepts are the only reality we can know. There is no model-independent test of reality. Hawking and Mlodinow do not doubt that there is a world “out there”, but in their story they say that the overwhelming weight of evidence based in observation and measurement indicates that there is no one Grand Design within our ken. The Grand Design is “in here”. Theirs is a theory about our theory-making. It is a theory about the nature and limits of the process by which we can construct stories in order to make sense of the world and predict as we go about the business of living: It might be that to describe the universe we have to employ different theories in different situations. Each theory may have its own version of reality, but according to model-dependent-realism, that is acceptable so long as the theories agree in their predictions whenever they overlap, that is, whenever they can both be applied. (p. 117) The authors state that their best candidate for the grand design is M-Theory, in which they say the “M” stands for “master”, “miracle”, or “mystery”, but might just as well stand for “many”. M-Theory is not a single theory of everything but a theory of theory-making, in which many theories are employed to describe the universe that we observe and each story stands the test of the scientific method of story telling so long as in prediction, it does not contradict the others when their paths cross. As with all stories, M-Theory must have initial conditions, and the authors triumphantly suggest the following: Because gravity shapes space and time, it allows space-time to be locally stable but globally unstable. On the scale of the entire universe, the positive energy of matter can ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1234 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | Page 1229-1234 Hersch, M. The Kingdom of Lies (in one story) be balanced by the negative gravitational energy, and so there is no restriction on the creation of whole universes. (p. 180) How useful is the M-Theory story that allows multiple universes, each governed by its own laws, to be spontaneously generated from lumpy randomness? What are its practical implications for the human enterprise? The authors say, We seem to be at a critical point in the history of science, in which we must alter our conception of goals of what makes a physical theory acceptable. It appears that the fundamental numbers, and even the form, of the apparent laws of nature are not demanded by logic or physical principle. The parameters are free to take on many values and the laws to take on any form that leads to a self-consistent mathematical theory, and they do take on different values and different forms in different universes. (p. 143) The turning point in our journey in search of the grand design is that both the evidence and the story, as best as we can tell it, is that many if not an infinite number of stories are possible, and, given the questions we ask, some of the stories we construct will work better than others, though none can ever be perfect. The business of science, it would seem, must be transformed from the search for external truth into a search for stories that serve our purposes as creatures who make their living in prediction. At the beginning of their book, the authors claim that their scientific storytelling has led to the end of philosophy, but in many ways their journey brings them full circle. It is more likely that the end of their story marks the beginning of another — one that attempts to unravel the question of what our purposes as predictive creatures might best be. And in the final analysis, that story can only be crafted in philosophical terms. As with the king and his trusted advisor in the parable proffered at the beginning of this review, the evidence indicates that we are condemned to live in a kingdom of lies, in which the predictive stories we create always begin and end with us at their center. The best we can do is to place a mark upon our foreheads to remind us that we are mad and get on with the business of making our lies as useful as possible. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

778 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 778-783 Gibbs, P. E., Exciting New Era of Particle Physics Essay Exciting New Era of Particle Physics Philip E. Gibbs* Abstract The editors of JCER ask me to share with JCER readers this article appeared in PSTJ V2(7) and I happily accept. I don’t think there has ever been a moment quite like this in physics before. Within the next few months, weeks or even days we will learn something new about the universe that will change our thinking forever. I don’t mean something like a little CP asymmetry or a new observation of neutrino physics. These things are great but they just pose questions that we cannot answer yet. What we are about to learn is going to generate so many new ideas in physics that the arXiv will run out of four digit numbers so that people have to start posting their papers in viXra. Am I exaggerating? Let us see take a look. Key Words: LHC, Tevatron, new particle, Higgs, New Era. I am of course talking about the Higgs sector and what it will tell us about the way particles interact. Given the mass exclusions we already know from the Tevatron it is already more likely that the Higgs sector will be described by something outside the standard model. With the exception of two small mass ranges either side of the presently excluded region, a Higgs boson that is consistent with the standard model is not now possible. The answer is probably going to be something else, perhaps a Higgs multiplet from some form of supersymmetry, or perhaps no Higgs at all. Whatever it is, it will lead to a new standard model with new physics that we don’t yet know, but we probably will by the end of this year. There is a fair chance it will lead to an understanding of what dark matter is, how inflation worked and perhaps a lot more. This is a great year to be a physicist. The fun has started at the Europhsyics HEP conference (EPS2011). It might have even begun sooner if CERN would release all the results as conference notes before the start as they did for PLHC in June 2011. Personally I would rather it was announced at the conference. That would be more dramatic but if it would become public before you can be sure we will report it at viXra Log. EPS 2011 So what have been shown at EPS2011, the main conference on particle physics this year? There was a list of 370 talks online and 130 posters. All are interesting in their own way, but at least 60 of them have included new results from LHC and the Tevatron that could contain new physics about the Higgs sector. These are the ones everybody has been looking out for. The interest starts on day one, the 21st July. ATLAS will present some SUSY search results which may or may not go beyond the results from PLHC last month. Then CFD and D0 will * Correspondence: Philip E. Gibbs, Ph.D., Independent Researcher, UK. E-Mail: phil@royalgenes.com Note: This Essay is based on http://blog.vixra.org/2011/07/16/hold-your-breath/ ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 779 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 778-783 Gibbs, P. E., Exciting New Era of Particle Physics give us all the details of their Higgs channels using 8.5/fb or 8.9/fb for each one. This will be covered in five talks in the space of a couple of hours. At moriond the Tevatron already gave results using up to 8.2/fb but not for all channels so there could be some very useful information here about lower mass Higgs. They are not likely to see a signal but they could limit further or even exclude those last few places where a standard model Higgs can live. On the second day we will see the Higgs search results from CMS and ATLAS, including all the individual channels and the combined results for each experiment. Some new searches for charged Higgs will also be included. This is the day when we are most likely to see the first signs of something spectacular, (if the beans have not already been spilt by then). That is because most of these results will be using about 1/fb of data, five times what was shown last month for a few searches and thirty times what has been used in most of them before. Even some of the posters have new results about SUSY on offer with 2011 data. I’m going to assume that 1/fb of data will be the norm for these results, but if it is less for some we will just have slightly longer to wait. On the fifth day the Plenary sessions will start. There will be an “opening” address days after all the interesting talks have sunk in, just like at ICHEP last year when President Sarkozy turned up to give a speech. We don’t know who will appear this time. There will be a press conference but that will probably be just for the Main Stream Media and will not be broadcast. We don’t care because we will already have all the best information. The plenary talks will be webcast live and will make fascinating viewing. The opening talk will be by Smoot on cosmology. There will be summaries of the results of the Higgs searches and outlooks from each continent. The plenary talks will be spread over three days. Let’s now look in more detail at what the Higgs sector has to offer that could be so thrilling. The Standard Model Higgs ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 780 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 778-783 Gibbs, P. E., Exciting New Era of Particle Physics What are the chances that the Higgs sector is described by a single standard model Higgs Boson? This is the least interesting result we could get because it would tell us nothing about Dark Matter or anything else beyond the standard model. Most of the mass regions for a SM Higgs are already ruled out. From theory we know that a lone Higgs boson below 135 GeV would destabilise the vacuum. The Tevatron has excluded it in direct searches from 157 GeV to 172 GeV, and electroweak precision tests from LEP and the Tevatron rule out a standard model Higgs above 182 GeV. So there are just two small windows where it can still be hiding. If it is not in these two mass regions then ATLAS will be able to show us a plot on the 22nd July that looks like this earlier simualtion This will exclude the possibility that a lone standard model Higgs is the answer. In case they are unlucky with the statistics, CMS have the same reach and the Tevatron combined analysis will too. If the Higgs is in those windows then the combined projected significance for the LHC is 3 to 5 sigmas depending on the exact mass. By combining the signals we should have a very good indication of where it is by next week, unless the standard model is not everything to be found. Higgsless What if there is no Higgs signal to be found? Theories that propose this tend to use quite innovative ideas such as gravity induced symmetry breaking. Because these ideas are often quite outlandish it is right to say that a total exclusion of the Higgs would be the most revolutionary result the LHC could provide. The combined 2/fb from ATLAS and CMS is sufficient to rule out the Higgs from about 120GeV to 535 GeV. Although a combined plot will not be presented at EPS-HEP, the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 781 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 778-783 Gibbs, P. E., Exciting New Era of Particle Physics individual results will be. These can be crudely combined by comparing bumps to see if the combined plot is likely to produce anything of significance. The Tevatron will also add information especially for the remaining window between 114 GeV and 120 GeV. So if the Higgs sector is Higgless up to 500 GeV we are going to have a good indication of that too next week. A much heavier Higgs might be possible but it would have to be accompanied by other heavy particles to account for the electroweak precision tests. Chances are there would be some other clue in the data about what is going on, and it might be revealed next week. Heavy Higgs Precision tests suggest that the Higgs cannot be heavy, but these tests assume there is no other physics. If we rule out the standard model they don’t apply anymore and a Higgs boson above 182 GeV is perfectly possible. Using this plot of projected signifcance we can get an idea of what might be coming. If there is a Higgs boson in the range 200 GeV to 500 Gev it should produce a signal with between 2 and 3 sigma signifcance from 1/fb. A signal of that size would be inconclusive, but if the same signal appears for both ATLAS and CMS it would be a different story. Here is a rough indication of what kind of shape we might expect to see if there is a heavy Higgs at around 200GeV ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 782 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 778-783 Gibbs, P. E., Exciting New Era of Particle Physics I have not included the expected significance but the peak at 200 GeV would have to be around 2 to 3 sigmas. An enlarged exclusion around the existing tevatron exclusion is to be expected and a new exclusion higher up is possible. This makes the signal an isolated peak, but the signal itself should be not more than about 20 GeV wide. Finding a heavy Higgs signal would be a dramatic new result because there would have to be something else with it to account for precision tests. That might show up too, either as another peak on the same plot or in other searches. Light Higgs and Multiplets A light Higgs is harder to locate for CMS and ATLAS but if they present their full digamma results as 1/fb and the Tevatron present their results at 8.5/fb, then the combined signal could be promising. A light Higgs is the signature of SUSY and is usually acompanied by other bosons. The MSSM has a multiplet of five Higgs some of which are charged. The next model has seven of them. These extra bosons are likely to be in a range that could be seen as another heavy Higgs or in charged Higgs searches that are also being presented. A light Higgs on its own destabilises the vacuum so it is hard to see how it could not be accompanied by something else. Whatever way you look at it the chances are we will have something positive to look at for EPS, and if we don’t there will be more data for the next conference with between 5/fb and 10/fb by the end of this year for each of ATLAS and CMS. Whatever is found will tell us in quantitative detail about how the Higgs sector works and it will inspire many new lines of theoretical search to be tested in the years that follow. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 783 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | July 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 5 | pp. 778-783 Gibbs, P. E., Exciting New Era of Particle Physics I know that some people think the collaborations need to be still more open and fast with their data, but it is unprecedented for such large collaborations in particle physics to show so many results so soon after the data has been collected. It is really an impressive achievement if they do. Therefore, we should all be grateful about the data of these experiments being made available very quickly. With a lot of other big-science experiments the people running them keep the data to themselves for years so that they can analyse it in detail before anyone else has a chance (c.f. Planck). The collaborations here are making extraordinary efforts to get the data out as soon as possible giving the whole physics community a chance to go through it. Science will progress faster that way so we should applaud them and hope that the theorists take full advantage of the opportunity being offered. References 1. http://blog.vixra.org/2011/07/16/hold-your-breath/ ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 373-376 Monteiro, M. Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers 373 Commentary Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers Marty Monteiro* ABSTRACT On the First Paper, a relevant point not mentioned by Nixon is the existence of ‘consciousness without experience’. This is the domain of the emergence of the primary mind or ‘cognition’. On the Second Paper, I agree with Greg Nixon that Being, Awareness is unexplainable, but this does not imply that it is impossible to 'describe' mind--->matter and matter---> transformation in a 'relatively' closed inter-individual (interobjects-intersubjects) loop. On the Third Paper, I agree with Nixon that God in absolute sense is hidden and objectively unknown but definitely not beyond existence. This touches also the issue of the compatibility of evolutionism-creationism and has to do with the ‘mental chemistry’ of disconnection-connection. Key Words: Panexperientialism, consciousness, hollows, mind, myth. 1. From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness Nixon (2010a) put consciousness in a broader context. Consciousness is not only an interactive process exclusively for human beings but pertains to all beings in the universe (pan-experientalism). He makes a distinction between non-conscious, subconscious, preconscious non-subjective experience and conscious subjective experience. Subliminal experience and other phenomena are examples of non-conscious experience (21 indicators of non-conscious experience in the appendix). “Experience without consciousness — that is, experience as responsive interactions within an ecosystem or perhaps any complex system (as opposed to a culture) but without any sort of awareness of that experience. Experience is viewed as really consisting of a continuum from momentary flashes into existence of ‘occasions of experience’ to the boundaryless experience which blossoms into transpersonal awareness”. A relevant point not mentioned by Nixon is the existence of ‘consciousness without experience’. This is the domain of the emergence of the primary mind or ‘cognition’. You can’t witness or experience your own birth at that very moment of birth, they don’t coincide. One can think to the 'mind set' or person’s cognitive process of “I” unaware to him/herself but consciously perceived as immediate experience by another person (mind-reading). Formally we can put this in a causal frame of "1st person cognition as cause" and "2nd person perception (subjective conscious experience) as effect" (Monteiro, M. 2009). 2. Hollows of experience In Part I Nixon (2010b) examines: 1) the origin of conscious experience: symbolic communication and conceptualization growing out from identification; and 2) how our own consciousness came to be: the separation of subject and object. In Part 2 Greg Nixon examines the origin of experience itself: the ontological question of Being, Awareness. It is suggested that awareness is identical with creative unfolding to be considered ultimately unexplainable. Correspondence: Marty Monteiro E-mail: marty.monteiro@yahoo.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 373-376 Monteiro, M. Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers 374 I agree with Greg Nixon that Being, Awareness is unexplainable, but this does not imply that it is impossible to 'describe' mind--->matter and matter---> transformation in a 'relatively' closed interindividual (interobjects-intersubjects) loop. To answer Greg Nixon's question 'how does any material entity create mind, consciousness, or even just experience?' is not a matter of creation, but mental unfolding what is already present in matter from the beginning (from strong force in the nucleus of atoms till strong love bond in persons). I agree with Greg Nixon that “the brain is not a producer of consciousness but a transducer which focuses diffuse mental “energies” into individual experience......and "any experience that precedes, exceeds, or transcends the brain is felt to be more real than the brain itself so the brain’s reality can only be reactive". However, brain's reactivity only holds in the context of stimulus-reflex. In case of the emergence of higher-order cognitive values, the brain mediates between merging of two lower-order percepts into a higher-order percept to outburst in cognitive value (fusion-fission). I agree with Greg Nixon that subjectivity results from other persons through the internalization of the language process already used by them. However, from the second person perspective, not only language is relevant for conscious identity, but starts with normative role behaviour. I wonder therefore whether the statement holds of "all that is outside of language is non-conscious experience in a reality that is largely a construction of our biological human sensory and memory systems relating to the things in themselves". Nixon (2010b) states “Another position derived from a combination of quantum physics and far from equilibrium thermodynamics sees experience of any sort creating experienced worlds from the chaos or semi-chaos of the unknown and non-experienced — the Kantian “things in themselves”. However, the autonomous non-experiencing thing or chaotic unrelated process and experiencing is the borderline between meaningless and meaningful to be incorporated in a philosophy or theory. The meaningless autonomy of a process (Ding-an-sich) must be the axiomatic starting point. The question is how to build the bridge between meaningless and meaningful experiencing: 1) one has to postulate accidental random material object interaction to generate or activate the mind (matter→mind); and 2) accidental random subject mental interaction to activate matter (mind→matter). Through interpersonal feedback, meaningful experiencing (perception) comes into being. The question is what happens in the non-causal gaps of matter→mind and mind→matter. Nixon (2010b) also states “The creative person learns from the active unconscious. The creative phase of initial inspiration dilutes the separation of subject and object.....” “[T]he creative impetus may be the ultimate source not only of consciousness or experience but also of all existence, preexisting all realities as potential. “What creativity is, in itself, cannot be known.....until it manifests in things or processes of this world. To attempt even to imagine a pre-existent unity, being, or substance without its differentiation and manifestation into a many is animpossibility. We know and can know nothing objectively of creative potential or of a God who is beyond existence”. But I wonder whether we cannot say anything about creativity in general (human, God, evolution, etc.) only but in material manifestation. In a relatively closed inter-object- and inter-subject system, the antecedent and consequent conditions of creativity can be known: 1) the antecedent condition is the creative mental product (mental synergy of merging percepts into a higher-order percept). This process of mentalization (the bottom-up of 2-1 fusion into a higher order percept) takes place behind perception; and 2) the consequent condition is the emergence of a creative cognitive value to occur outside conscious experiencing (a person is at that moment not aware of his cognition as “I” and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 373-376 Monteiro, M. Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers 375 concomitant value) and the manifestation of the creative material product (the top-down material synergy) by crossing the mind→matter threshold. The domain of what happens unconsciously (behind perception) and preconsciously (cognition before perception), the postulate of a God as a creating-unifying force (CUF) holds. I agree with GN that God in absolute sense is hidden and objectively unknown but definitely not beyond existence. This touches also the issue of the compatibility of evolutionism-creationism and has to do with the ‘mental chemistry’ of disconnection-connection (Monteiro, 2009). 3. Myth and Mind Nixon (2010c) states that “[m]y thesis that human conscious experience appeared suddenly, at one point in time....caused by an existential crisis crossing a threshold.... paving the way for myth, symbolic, self, creativity, etc.” I agree that a breakthrough of human consciousness generating self-awareness, symbolic interaction, etc, which lower vertebrates lacks, but I wonder whether this is a sudden occurrence qua mechanism in evolution. Mentalization unfolding in the human being is a 2→1 fusion mechanism, which is operational from the beginning based on 2→1 fusion mechanism of materialization (wateratom→helium; photosynthesis, etc.) and the other way around. Materialization and mentalization goes hand in hand. However, one can state a ‘crisis’ or three-folded great leap between anorganic matter, organic matter and human specie. Nixon (2010c) further state that “Intersubjectivity is a term open to many meanings but the way it is intended here is to imply something more than mere communication from isolated mental monad to isolated mental monad.” But If one tries to tackle the problem of inter-subject (or inter-object) behaviour it is prerequisite to start with what Nixon calls “the isolated mental monad (object/subject) to isolated mental monad”. This is the foundation prior to symbolic interaction, self concept, creativity, myth, etc. To attribute to living organisms consciousness is generally taken for granted, but to state that atoms have a consciousness is another story. Can 'dark energy' be reserved as the source of consciousness as the basis to create matter through transformation or the other way around that through material annihilation matter/energy is transformed into consciousness (black hole)? A universal outlook is therefore prerequisite to start with a simple but abstract descriptive experimental social human process model which is also assumed to be valid down the evolutionary ladder of quanta. Greg Nixon joins the science community subscribing the universal mind an touches the issue of intersubjectivity. The problem concerns the 'homunculus' (Nixon: We experience through the self). In general, I agree with Nixon's articles, but the main points of discussion are the ‘existence of cognition’, the redundant construct of self (homunculus) and ‘God’s existence’ as creating-unifying force (CUF). The domain of what happens unconsciously (behind perception) and preconsciously (cognition before perception), the postulate of a God as a creating-unifying force (CUF) holds. I agree with Nixon that God in absolute sense is hidden and objectively unknown but definitely not beyond existence. This touches also the issue of the compatibility of evolutionism-creationism and has to do with the ‘mental chemistry’ of disconnection-connection (Monteiro, 2009). References Monteiro, M (2009), Model of man: mind & matter – mind & morality. AEG Publishing Group. New York. Nixon, G. M. (2010a). From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness: The Continuum of Experience. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 373-376 Monteiro, M. Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers 376 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 1(3): 216-233. Nixon, G. M. (2010b) Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. Nixon,G. M. (2010c) Myth and mind: the origin of human consciousness in the discovery of the sacred. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 289-337. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

458 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 458-459 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Stephen Deiss Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Stephen Deiss Gregory M. Nixon* Stephen R. Deiss is a research scientist for his own consulting firm, Applied Neurodynamics (neural networks systems engineering and consciousness studies) http://www.appliedneuro.com/ who wrote one of the most intriguing chapters, in the recently published Mind that Abides: Panpsychism in the New Millennium (2009). In it he postulates that rudimentary memory is what transforms simple spasms of sensation into consciousness. This seems to have everything to do with learning and I was impressed with this equation of learning and mind. However, Deiss said nothing about those spasms of sensation in themselves. Were they felt? If so, is that not consciousness? If these sensations are not conscious experience, what are they, non-conscious experience? I was honoured to receive this brief commentary from Deiss, especially since his ideas seemed to me to support the idea of non-conscious experience I expressed most strongly in my first essay. I noted this when I reviewed the above book for JCS (Nixon, 2009). The major difference in our thinking appears to be between bodily memory, which I consider mostly unconscious, and conscious remembering, a purely human activity. Deiss considers consciousness to appear when certain sensations that reference the environment are retained enough so that the organism learns to pursue or avoid whatever it is they indicate when they appear again. I regard conscious experience and thus conscious remembering to begin with symbolic interaction, but here I have to admit that Deiss may have a point. Not that I agree that consciousness (and, again, the only consciousness we humans know is self-consciousness) begins with such rudimentary S->R memory, but Deiss has pinpointed another major point of transformation in the naturalization of awareness. When entities began to learn from their own autonomic responses and automatically redirect their behaviour, something new had appeared on Earth. It may be that experience – as in relational sensations – that were external to each proto-entity up until this moment, now became internalized and the selfexperiencing entity truly became an identifiable existent. I speculate that before learning, before internalization, sensations only occurred at the point of contact between two systems or proto-entities: this is what I mean by relational experience. But once the memory of such sensations was retained by the organism, the organism, for the first time, became a unified and self-contained entity and could henceforth respond in more complex ways. This is a very important step in the evolution of conscious experience from mere non-conscious sensations and I thank Deiss for pointing this out. Deiss also expresses some misgivings about my suggestion that non-conscious or unconscious experience gives psi its medium. What I refer to are the many anecdotes Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 459 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 458-459 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Stephen Deiss but also the scientific research (see Radin, 1997) that shows psi phenomena do indeed take place but that they are not generally predictable or controllable. My suggestion is that most of these extra-sensory happenings take place at an unconscious level and affect us deeply in myriad ways of which we are not directly aware because we do not allow our unconsious knowledge to enter our conscious minds. References Deiss, S. R. (2008). Welcome to applied neurodynamics. Online: http://www.appliedneuro.com/ Deiss, S. R. (2009). Universal correlates of consciousness. In D. Skrbina (ed.), Mind that abides: Panpsychism in the new millennium (pp. 137-158). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Deis, S. R. (2010) Commentary on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3), 348-349. Nixon, G. M. (2009). Book Review: Skrbina’s Mind that abides: Panpsychism in the new millennium. Journal of Consciousness Studies 16 (9), 116-121. Radin, D. (1997). The conscious universe: The scientific truth of psychic phenomena: San Francisco: HarperCollins. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

78 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Article Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Graham P. Smetham* Abstract The evidence which has been claimed for the formative causation hypothesis is controversial and is generally discounted by mainstream workers in the field. And, because the power of the dominance of the materialist worldview is still overwhelming the kind of evidence required in order to convince skeptics would have to be irresistible. This is because there seems to be a deeply ingrained antagonistic prejudice towards theories which threaten materialistic approaches to understanding the process of reality. The approach adopted within the quantum Mindnature perspective in challenging the mechanistic-materialist worldview begins from a significantly different point because it takes the quantum evidence as it is now as the ground for developing a metaphysical overview, an overview which precisely coheres with all significant current quantum perspectives. As this work shows the breadth, scope and depth of the overarching and detailed metaphysical perspective is so dramatic that it is difficult to conceive of an alternative metaphysical perspective bringing together diverse areas of discourse together in such a detailed and precise manner. It was not anticipated at the outset, for instance, that the natural evolutionary development of the quantum Mindnature perspective itself would account for the process of evolution as well as otherwise unexplained phenomena within the field of evolutionary development. And one of the significant implications of this perspective is that something akin to formative causation must be operating at, and through, the quantum level. Keywords: Quantum Evolution, Evolutionary Development, Sheldrake‟s Morphogenetic Fields, Bohm‟s Implicate Orders, Goswami‟s Creative Universe. The dramatic and far reaching nature of the discoveries which led to the development of the perspective of evolutionary-development biology have, in large degree, still to be appreciated. Indeed, as we shall see in the course of this paper, it might be said that to a great extent the hugely significant challenge to the materialistic grounding of the mainstream view within evolutionary thinking has been ameliorated by attempts to claim that, although the implications of the evolutionary-development paradigm are indeed remarkable, they are easily incorporated into the Darwinian fold. As Sean B. Carroll sums up the Darwinian perspective in his book on „the new science of Evo Devo‟ Endless Forms Most Beautiful: Darwin asked his reader to consider how slight changes, introduced at different points in the process (of evolution) and in different parts of the body, over the course of many thousands or a million generations, spanning perhaps tens of thousands to a few * Correspondence: Graham Smetham, http://www.quantumbuddhism.com E-mail:graham@quantumbuddhsim.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 79 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution million years, can produce different forms that are adapted to different circumstances and that possess unique capabilities. That is evolution in a nutshell.1 What Carroll does not point out is the overwhelming predominance of a materialist metaphysical paradigm which underpins the Darwinian worldview. Thus when Richard Dawkins laid the metaphysical foundations for his exposition of his vision of The Blind Watchmaker, he did so by claiming the validity of asserting a foundational metaphysical materialist worldview „for everyday purposes‟: We peel our way down the hierarchy, until we reach units so simple that, for everyday purposes, we no longer feel the need to ask questions about them.2 In his book Darwin’s Dangerous Idea Daniel Dennett, Dawkins‟ compatriot in the cause of materialism, is intellectually pugilistic in his rallying cry for the worldview of materialism: An impersonal, unreflective, robotic, mindless little scrap of molecular machinery is the ultimate basis of all the agency, and hence meaning, and hence consciousness, in the universe.3 Thus Darwinism and materialism have become almost complementary aspects of a common „naturalist‟ worldview. A worldview within which the „gene,‟ in large part thanks to the strident proselytizing activities on the part of Dawkins, became considered to be the ontologically privileged material unit which had somehow magically evolved a desperation to survive. In his book The Extended Phenotype Dawkins makes the following impassioned and wildly anthropomorphic declaration of the ontological primacy of the „gene‟: …we should see through individual organisms. We see through them to the replicating fragments of DNA within, and we see the wider world as an arena in which these genetic fragments play out their tournaments of manipulative skill. Genes manipulate the world and shape it to assist their replication. It happens that they have „chosen‟ to do so largely by molding matter into multicellular chunks which we call organisms, but this might not have been so. Fundamentally what is going on is that replicating molecules ensure their survival by means of their phenotypic effect on the world. It is only incidentally true that those phenotypic effects happen to be packaged up into units called individual organisms.4 This is an astonishingly implausible claim which basically asserts that all biological organisms, all cultural activities, and consciousness itself are nothing other than expendable epiphenomenal products which have been adventitiously generated in order that the ultimately fundamental units of reality - genes – may survive, even though in reality these putatively ultimate units do not materially survive as the same „stuff‟ any more than any other apparently „material‟ aspect of an organism. One of the core tenets of this materialist Darwinism was the belief that the genes involved in the evolution of different species would themselves be different, different species would not have common gene structure. Thus the evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr wrote confidently in the 1960‟s that: Much that has been learned about gene physiology makes it evident that the search for homologous genes is quite futile except in very close relatives. If there is only one efficient solution for a certain functional demand, very different gene complexes will come up with the same solution, no matter how different the pathway by which it is ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 80 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution achieved. The saying “Many roads lead to Rome” is as true in evolution as in daily affairs. 5 An excellent example of a pronouncement made on the basis of little evidence but a huge emotional investment in the materialist Darwinian worldview, an investment which can still be found in much „scientific‟ writing. However, this presuppositional assumption has now been shown by the evolutionary-development revolution in biology to be completely false; as Carroll writes: The first shots in the Evo Devo revolution revealed that despite their great differences in appearance and physiology, all complex animals-flies and flycatchers, dinosaurs and trilobites, butterflies and zebras and humans-share a common “tool kit” of “master” genes that govern the formation and patterning of their bodies and body parts. … The important point to appreciate from the outset is that this discovery shattered our previous notions of animal relationships and of what made animals different, and opened up a whole new way of looking at evolution.6 In other words, all animals, of whatever species whatsoever, share a fundamental genetic structure which underpins a hierarchical development of differentiation. As we shall see, when this revolution in our understanding of the functioning of genes and the DNA components of genes is placed in the context of the other great twentieth century revolution in science – the quantum revolution – the new metaphysical worldview which emerges goes far beyond the new vistas currently being explored by the Evo Devo community. In particular, it will become clear that the primary process of evolution is not that which takes place over time on the material plane but, rather, it is that process of development which cascades from a deep quantum level of intentionality through a sequence of immaterial and subtle „implicate orders‟ of „unfoldment‟, to use the terminology coined by physicist David Bohm, until there is apparent manifestation on the „material‟ plane‟. In order to appreciate the full impact of the „whole new way of looking at evolution‟ it will be useful to appreciate the view that had become central to the hardcore materialist „neoDarwinian‟ perspective as presented in the early writings of Richard Dawkins (he has become rather ambiguous and contradictory on the issue in recent times) and the continued materialist interpretation of evolution preached by Daniel Dennett. As we have see above, the received, and completely false, wisdom of the academic „authorities‟ in the field prior to evo-devo was that the genes responsible for different species would be different, and the more distant the phyla involved the greater the difference would be expected to be. Thus Dawkins, writing in 1998, tells us that: The genes that survive in camels will, to be sure, include some that are particularly good at surviving in deserts, and they may even be shared with desert rats and desert foxes. But, more importantly, successful genes will be those that are good at surviving in an environment consisting of the other genes that are typically found in the species. … It is not the genes of any given individual that cooperate well together. They have never been together in that combination, for every genome in a sexually reproducing species is unique … It is the genes of the species at large that cooperate, because they have met before, often, and in the intimately shared environment of the cell…7 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 81 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution It is impossible not to point out in passing that this is actually incoherent mythology, a neoDarwinian piece of, unsubstantiated even at the time, internally inconsistent fantasy which has now been shown, by the evidence, to be beyond the misguided. Suppose, for instance, someone were to claim that the genes that survive in camels were not good at surviving in deserts! Furthermore is it actually a sane possibility that the various genes within a species would not be good at cooperating? According to Dawkins the genes within particular individuals within a species do not cooperate because they have not met before, but, on the other hand, the genes of the species have often met before and therefore do cooperate. Surely this is an extremely unlikely scenario, the genes of a particular species happily cooperating together, until, that is, they happen to congregate together in an individual of the species! It is also a scenario completely at variance with the evidence of evo-devo which indicates that the genes within any individual do nothing else but cooperate, indeed if one thinks about the issue for even a moment it is difficult to comprehend how an embryo could possibly develop without cooperation, so what the particular „cooperation‟ Dawkins is referring to, a cooperation not exhibited by genes within the individual, is difficult to fathom. Leaving aside this particular piece of Dawkinsian incoherence, the picture of („selfishly‟) selfsufficient, and self-enclosed, genetic material units, carrying items of on-board inform-ation, units which become increasingly disparate as species and environment diverge, is clear. Thus „surviving genes in camels‟, we are told, „may even be shared with desert rats and desert foxes‟, presumably because of the common environment. The implication, however, is that species inhabiting differing environments will not share commonality of genes. This fundamental, and mistaken, neo-Darwinian view, then, is that the more widely species diverge from each other, so also does the genetic make-up of those species. As Carroll elucidates the entrenched viewpoint: The classification of organisms, the assignment into like and unlike, has largely been driven by a consideration of form. So the long standing assumption has been the greater the disparity in form, the less, if anything, any two species would have in common at the level of their genes.8 So here we find Carroll indicating that the view which Dawkins so often stridently proclaimed to be „scientific fact‟ was actually always an „assumption! It was this neo-Darwinian metaphysical mythology that was completely discredited when the evidence became available. Carroll writes that „this view was entirely incorrect‟ and he quotes Stephen Jay Gould: The central significance of our dawning understanding of the genetics of development lies not in the simple discovery of something utterly unknown … but in the explicitly unexpected character of these findings, and in the revisions and extensions thus required of evolutionary theory.9 It is intriguing that Gould should paper over the fact that the evo-devo revolution actually indicated the complete fallaciousness of core assumptions of the materialistic appropriation of Darwinism that had occurred by using terms such as „revisions and extensions‟. For the revolution in a sense was as profound as the quantum revolution in physics and, as we shall see, has a lot to do with the quantum revolution, although most current proponents of the evo- ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 82 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution devo perspective seem to be hard at work to preserve an outmoded and inappropriate materialist perspective. In is also revealing that Gould refers to the „unexpected character of these findings‟ for one of the first things which should surely strike anyone of insight on coming across the evo-devo is that the elucidation provided actually contains a much greater level of coherency than the previous understanding. Consider, for example, Myers‟ confident and utterly fallacious claim that „very different gene complexes will come up with the same solution, no matter how different the pathway by which it is achieved.‟ The “Many roads lead to Rome” view is completely counter intuitive; the notion that genes should diversify and differentiate into radical different characters, becoming more and more disparate as the species draw apart and yet at the same time should converge on identical solutions to various evolutionary challenges is surely unlikely, however different the species involved may be. Neither was there evidence for it, it was simply considered as being „obvious‟, so obvious that some proponents of completely fallacious worldviews made good names and livings for themselves promulgating falsehoods. For now we know that: Natural selection has not forged many times completely from scratch; there is a common genetic ingredient to making each eye type, as well as to the many types of appendages, hearts, etc. These common ingredients must date deep back in time, before there were vertebrates or arthropods, to animals that may have first used these genes to build structures with which to see, sense, eat or move. These animals are the distant ancestors of most modern animals, including ourselves.10 This is a paradigm which accounts for the facts of evolution far more coherently, as well as being in accord with actual evidence, than the „Many Roads‟ scenario. In order to prepare the way for an initial appreciation of the evo-devo paradigm it is useful to consider the „object-oriented‟ paradigm within computer modeling which constitutes the initial phase of computer systems development. The object of this approach is to be able to design a computer software system in a hierarchical modular fashion in which the system starts at the base as a highly abstract module and then descends through levels of „objectclasses‟ of increasing complexity; each level adds functionality to the level above. Thus in figure 1 we see that at the top of the class tree there is the most „abstract‟ class which is just a bank account. Within this class only the information which is common to all bank accounts can be placed, information which is specific to various types of bank account are contained in the classes on lower levels of the tree. A further refinement of this hierarchical structure which is a vital part of the objectorientation paradigm is the idea of „virtual members‟. These are members of a class which form part of the overall structure but cannot be fully specified within the class because the exact form of the member depends upon the implementation of members at a lower level of the hierarchy. So the top level „bank account‟ class might look as shown in figure 2. The personal details of the account holder can be „implemented‟ within this level but the „virtual‟ members will be fully specified at a lower level of the object hierarchy. Thus the „virtual‟ members specify an „abstract‟ structure which can be implemented in different ways at a later point depending upon the paths taken through the lower levels of the hierarchy. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 83 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Fig 1 Fig 2 The findings of the evo-devo revolution now indicate that a similar hierarchical modular development is fundamental within the evolutionary development of species. Figure 3 gives a flavor of this perspective in a very crude and reduced form, indicating the principle rather than detail. The essential point is that, whereas the previous view of divergent „random‟ mutation of material gene units asserted the lack of common structure between divergent species it now turns out that in fact there is a common structure, which is clearly apparent within the genetic structure underlying all species. The first indication of this commonality was a result of research into the genetic makeup of fruit flies and mice. In order to elucidate this, a quick outline of the terminology is required. The fundamental process which appears to drive the process of the embryonic development is the division and differentiation of cells (the reason for the word „appears‟ will become apparent later) which is itself determined by the functioning of the strings of DNA within the cells. Each chromosome within a cell is a long molecule of DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid); the chromosome in turn is identified as consisting of smaller strands of DNA called genes, so genes are smaller components, each occupying its own particular location within the chromosome, some of which are identified as having particular tasks within the development of the embryo (figure 4a). DNA itself is composed of two strands of nucleotides wrapped around each other in the famous double helix configuration; each nucleotide is comprised of one of four distinct bases: Adenine (A), Cytosine (C), Thymine (T), Guanine (G), and these bases map on to each other to form the DNA helix as indicated in fig 5: A can only link with T, and G with C. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 84 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Fig 3 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 85 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Fig 4 Fig 5 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 86 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Within the functioning of cells the DNA is responsible for the manufacturing of proteins through the intermediary production of „messenger‟ RNA (mRNA). A single strand of mRNA is produced from one strand of the DNA double helix, a process termed „transcription‟. Subsequently the mRNA strand is „decoded‟ into a protein sequence; this process is termed „translation‟. Proteins are comprised of sequences of amino acids, and this sequence determines the configuration and chemical properties of the target proteins; and these properties determine the function of the protein in the functioning of the organism, whether they function as carriers of oxygen or are constituents of muscle fiber and so on. One of the crucial discoveries which opened the way to the evo-devo paradigm was the discovery by François Jacob and Jacques Monod of the fundamental switching mechanism which takes place in order to regulate the mode of functioning of genes. In their investigation of the functioning of the intestinal bacterium E.Coli Jacob and Monod discovered the existence of gene „repressor‟ sites which determine whether or not a gene is „on‟ or „off‟ and, therefore, whether gene transcription into mRNA takes place. This mechanism is mediated by the production, in certain circumstances, of a DNA „binding protein‟; this binding protein binds with a specific DNA sequence and thereby turns the gene on or off. The next piece of the puzzle was provided by the mapping of the genes on the third (of four) chromosome of the fruit fly onto the parts of the fly‟s anatomy that they directed: …the genes sat close together in two clusters. One cluster, the Bithorax Complex, contained three genes that affected the back half of the fly; the other, the Antennapedia Complex, contained five genes that affected the front half of the fly. Even more provocative, the relative order of the genes in the two clusters corresponded to the relative order of the body parts they affected…11 This correspondence between genes and the parts of the fruit fly, and the fruit fly egg, is shown in figure 6. Fig 6 – Hox genes in the Fruit Fly. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 87 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution These two pieces of the puzzle linked together beautifully when the proteins which made up the genes were analyzed and it was discovered that all eight genes had a short stretch of a 60 amino acid domain that were all similar in sequence. This shared sequence was called a „homeobox‟ and the corresponding protein domain was called the „homeodomain‟; subsequently the genes were dubbed „Hox‟ genes. It then became apparent that the homeodomains were DNA-binding domains which were triggered by corresponding proteins, an insight which indicated that genes were switched on or off by the presence of the relevant binding proteins; so the presence of proteins acted as activators of switches that determined the manner of functioning of various Hox genes. Fig 7 Carroll gives an example of how Hox genes and gene switches function to determine the longitudinal stripe markings in a fly embryo. Specific protein activators and repressors bind to various switch locations on the DNA strand to the side of the actual gene; this is „similar to the way a specific key fits into a particular lock.‟ Thus in fig 7 the combination of the activator and repressor proteins determine that the mRNA protein is „expressed‟ and activates a particular stripe in the embryo. The question which naturally arises, of course, is what determines the particular combination of activators and repressors that activate the switches at any particular point in development. It turns out that there is a sequential cascade of activation of switches, so one set of activators and repressors determine the proteins which are operative in the next phase; as Carroll says it is a „chicken and egg‟ scenario: Ultimately, the beginning of spatial information in the embryo often traces back to asymmetrically distributed molecules deposited in the egg during its production in the ovary … (so the egg did come before the chicken)… However, Carroll declines to speculate on where the first „egg‟ came from. The next remarkable discovery was of the same genetic structure and functioning in many diverse animals, „various bugs, earthworms, frogs, cows, and humans‟: …the similarities among the species were astounding … Such sequence similarity was just stunning. The evolutionary lines that led to flies and mice diverged more than 500 million years ago, before the famous Cambrian Explosion that gave rise to ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 88 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution most animal types. No biologist had even the foggiest notion that such similarities could exist between genes of such different animals. These Hox genes were so important that there sequences had been preserved throughout this enormous span of animal evolution.12 When the arrangement of the Hox genes in mice was figured out the mapping of structure, including the isomorphism between gene order and body structure, between the fruit fly and mice turned out to be, as Carroll says, „amazing‟. Figure 8 shows the correspondences between the common underlying gene structure and fly and mouse embryo. So, as Carroll points out: Fig 8 It was inescapable. Clusters of Hox genes shaped the development of animals as different as flies and mice, and now we know that includes just about every animal in the kingdom, including humans and elephants.13 And it soon became apparent that this commonality extended to other fundamental types of gene complexes. The next type of gene to be shown to be common across species was the socalled eyeless gene (so called because, when mutated in flies, it is responsible for the loss of eyes) which is called Aniridia in humans and Small eye in mice, together these three genes are collectively known as Pax-6 and they have been found to be significant for the development of all kinds of different types of eyes across species. The fact that the gene responsible for the development of eyes is common is dramatic (or, as Caroll says, „intriguing and provocative‟) because humans and mice have camera-type eyes whereas flies have compound eyes; so the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 89 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution same gene regulates the development and placement of eyes but the type of eye depends on other factors. This feature was demonstrated in an experiment in which mouse Small eye genes were transplanted into various strange places in flies such as the wings. The result was the development of fly type eye structures on the fly wings, structures induced by the presence of mouse eye-producing genes. Another component of what Carroll calls the „gene tool kit‟ is the Distal-less (Dll) gene, which was so called because when it is mutated the distal, or outer, parts of fly limbs fail to develop. Again these genes are found to be operative in the development of „all sorts of things that stuck out of animal bodies:‟14 These included chicken legs, fish fins, the appendages of marine worms (called „parapodia‟), the ampulae and siphons on sea squirts, and even the tube feet on sea urchins. This was another example, like Pax-6, of a tool kit gene involved in building vastly different structures that only share, at most, the common feature of projecting away from the main body. These animals are also representatives of different major branches of the animal tree.15 The final component of the gene toolkit mentioned by Carroll is the tinman gene, which is so named after the character in The Wizard of Oz who lacked a heart; flies have an open circulatory system, which means they do not have a heart as such. These genes were found to have mammalian versions (NK2 family) which are significant in heart formation in vertebrates, including ourselves. The multi-functionality of the Distal-less gene is remarkable. As Carroll points out, fourteen or more different types of appendages project out from the body of a Crayfish (fig 9) and the Distal less gene is significant in the development of them all. But the Distal less gene is not only responsible for land (underwater or dry land) limb development; it is also significant in the placing of spots on butterfly wings: Distal-less still kept its old job: it was also deployed in the distal parts of all developing butterfly limbs, just as in all other insects and arthropods. The spots of the Distal-less expression in butterfly wings were a new trick, “learned” long after its ancient role in limb-building. Remember everything about a toolkit protein‟s action depends on context.16 It is in passages such as this that Carroll subtly reveals his adherence to the old neo-Darwinian notion that that the development of species, a process driven by changes in the way in which various gene components are expressed through the operation of the surrounding regulatory switching protein mechanisms, is a result of random mutations which occur over time, which in this particular case allows Distal-less gene mechanism to „learn‟ a new role. In the old Dawkins style model it was, fallaciously, asserted that the actual material makeup of the genes themselves mutated and thereby produced new phenotypes (fully developed organisms) ready to be filtered and winnowed by the tooth-and-claw fight with the environment. But in the new Evo-Devo vision, as portrayed by Carroll, it is changes in the regulatory switches, rather than the genes, that are responsible for evolutionary changes. The actual mechanism or mechanism responsible for such changes, however, is left somewhat hazy. In the case of the Distal-less regulatory mechanism becoming involved in the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 90 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution determination of the patterning of the outer butterfly wing adornment, for instance, we are simply told that it somehow „learned‟ to add this functionality to its repertoire over the course of time. But towards the end of his book Carroll nails his materialist and mechanistic colors to the evolutionary flagpole when he considers the remarkable fact that the same features, which are determined by the functioning of the same gene complexes (genes plus regulatory protein mechanisms), are found across diverse species, a discovery which is redolent with resonance of the dreaded notion of „design‟: Fig 9 These instances of evolution repeating itself directly address difficulties some have had in grasping the role of random mutation in the evolutionary process. Some people have found it hard to imagine how novelty and complexity arise from a “random process.” The key distinction is that while the generation of genetic variation by mutation is a completely random process, the sorting out of these variations as to which will persist and which will be discarded is determined by a powerful, selective nonrandom process. Of the hundreds of millions or billions of individual base pairs in an animal genome, all are equally susceptible to random copying errors or physical damage that cause mutations. But only a tiny fraction of all possible mutations can alter a mammal‟s coat in a viable manner, or reduce a stickleback‟s spines without causing catastrophic collateral damage. In large populations of animals, over eons of time, such mutations will arise simply as a matter of probability. When they do occur, positive selection upon the trait they affect will cause them to spread in populations over time.17 This vestigial remnant of the neo-Darwinian worldview, however, is no more than an implausible echo of what was, in the days of the ascendency of the neo-Darwinian mythological worldview, nothing more than a speculative and incoherent fantasy which was adopted in order to preserve a Newtonian materialism which was itself heading for extinction. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 91 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution The extent of the desperation in this presentation is clearly apparent in the fact that it is an account which posits the most unlikely scenario, the notion that accumulation of evolutionary errors is responsible for the astonishingly organized and coordinated growth of increasingly complex and evolved biological organisms, in the face of contrary evidence that there is an inbuilt directionality and at least a minimal intentionality or what Paul Davies calls a „subtle teleology‟ within the process of evolution. The very example of the functioning of E. Coli which Carroll uses to illustrate the role of proteins as triggers for the activation of genes mitigates against the mythology of randomness. As Professor Patricia L. Foster, of the Biology Department of Indiana University, points out: When populations of microorganisms are subject to certain nonlethal selections, useful mutants arise … whereas useless mutants do not. This phenomenon, known as adaptive, directed, or selection-induced mutation, challenges the long-held belief that mutations only arise at random and without regard to utility. 18 And, of course, the neo-Darwinian worldview has nothing to say on the presence of consciousness, and, within humans, full-blown self-consciousness, as a significant feature of the organisms produced by the universal evolutionary process. In his excellent book Life’s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe Professor Simon Conway Morris has also demonstrated the prevalence of the convergence of evolutionary „solutions‟ to survival challenges across widely differing species, a phenomenon which suggests that templates for the structure of various components of plant and animal physiology are seeded into the potentialities underlying the evolutionary process. And the conclusion he draws is that, contrary to the „drunken walk‟ within a maze of mechanistic randomness viewpoint of various materialist evolutionary biologists, there is teleology towards the production of increasing levels of complexity, and associated sentience, within the ground potentiality of the process of evolution such that the end point of an organism having the kind of self-aware intelligence of human beings is an inevitability: So, if convergence is going to be a guiding principle in the understanding of evolution, then of all the areas worth investigating one of the most interesting must surely be to look at what constraints if any, accompany the development of sensory organs. It is here, if anywhere, that we can approach the wider problem of the evolution of the nervous systems, brains, and perhaps ultimately sentience. And this is turn might give some clues as to whether indeed intelligence is some quirky end point of the evolutionary process or whether in reality it is more-or-less inevitable, an emergent property that is wired into the biosphere.19 In other words Conway Morris adopts a „Anthropic‟ perspective which hold that it is sentience and consciousness which are the driving force and target of the evolutionary process, a viewpoint not entertained willingly amongst the denizens of materialist enclaves, but, as we shall see, a perspective which is now increasingly suggested by quantum evidence. The American cognitive scientist and philosopher Jerry Fodor, Professor of Philosophy at Rutgers University, in a recent essay Why Pigs Don’t Fly, has questioned the neo-Darwinian ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 92 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution assumption of random „adaptationism‟ and has indicated that there are perhaps more viable alternatives: Everybody thinks evo-devo must be at least part of the truth, since nobody thinks that phenotypes are shaped directly by environmental variables. Even the hardest core Darwinists agree that environmental effects on a creature‟s phenotype are mediated by their effects on the creature‟s genes: its „genome‟. Indeed, in the typical case, the environment selects a phenotype by selecting a genome that the phenotype expresses. Once in place, this sort of reasoning spreads to other endogenous factors. Phenotypic structure carries information about genetic structure. And genotypic structure carries information about the biochemistry of genes. And the biochemical structure of genes carries information about their physical structure. And so on down to quantum mechanics for all I know.20 And here Fodor takes the descent through the levels of the physical world down to the physical description of the functioning of reality which most physicists consider to be the ultimate explanatory level: quantum physics. Furthermore it is significant that Fodor qualifies his statement of the possibility that quantum physics might be significant in the process of evolution by the phrase „for all I know‟, indicating a lack of knowledge to adjudicate the possibility. For it seems to be the case that very few writers and commentators on the issue, at least within the fold of evolutionary biologists, do have the necessary acquaintance with the radical findings of quantum theory in order to approach the issue of the possibility that evolution is primarily driven from the quantum level. Thus Dawkins tells us that, when it comes to quantum theory: …this is where I must make my excuses and leave. Sometimes I imagine I have some appreciation of the poetry of quantum theory, but I have yet to achieve an understanding deep enough to explain it to others.21 What Dawkins does not tell us, however, is how, given his incompetence at the quantum level, he can possibly be certain, as he certainly seems to be, that genes are the „selfish‟ ontologically primary drivers of the evolutionary process. For, as Fodor indicates, genes can themselves be reduced to their molecular constituents and the functioning of such molecular units depends upon the details of quantum physics. As Johnjoe McFadden, Professor of Molecular Genetics at the University of Surrey, points out: Watson and Crick‟s structure (of DNA) was therefore the culmination of centuries of biological progress. The great mysteries were laid bare: how biological information was encoded, how it was inherited and how it was changed. But it also pointed in a quite surprising direction, towards the involvement of that other great triumph of the 20th century science – quantum mechanics – in the fundamental basis of life and the driving force of evolution.”22 It is truly remarkable how so many interested parties working in the field of evolutionary biology remain quite happy to ignore the dramatic discoveries of quantum physics, discoveries which have completely revolutionised our understanding of what appears to be a „material‟ world. For if one thing has been established beyond doubt by the quantum revolution it is that Cartesian-Newtonian type „matter‟ „does not exist‟, to quote quantum physicist Professor Henry Stapp. Furthermore it is now necessary to accept that the ultimate nature of what appears to be the material world is actually, again quoting Stapp, „idea-like‟, or of the nature of Mind. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 93 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution This viewpoint is becoming increasingly established within quantum philosophy, although there are stubborn pockets of materialist desperation resisting the cascade of quantum evidence. And, furthermore, it is a conclusion which was clearly reached by many of the founding fathers of quantum theory, which is why Max Planck asserted that: All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter.23 And Schrödinger wrote that: Mind has erected the objective outside world … out of its own stuff.24 Furthermore, in his 1944 book What is Life Schrödinger explicitly wondered whether there might be a quantum basis for the genetic mechanism of inheritance. More recently physicist Amit Goswami has indicated the necessity of placing the operations of a universal field of awareness-consciousness as being fundamental in the orchestration of the evolutionary process: …if we do science on the basis of consciousness, on the primacy of consciousness, then we can see in this phenomenon creativity, real creativity of consciousness. In other words we can truly see that consciousness is operating creatively even in biology, even in the evolution of the species.25 This proposal will be vigorously resisted by the materialist minded cohorts of the greater number of evolutionary biologists within which the notion of the materialist „chance and necessity‟ paradigm predominates; however, it is the kind of perspective which is required by the quantum evidence. In my previous essay The Grand Designer: Can Hawking’s Godless Theory of Everything Run Without God (Vol 1, No. 7 – 2010) I demonstrated that if one took the core proposals for the basis of the Theory of Everything contained within Hawking and Mlodinow‟s book The Grand Design seriously then the conclusions they reach, in particular the conclusion that a „whole universe‟ can „just appear out of nothing‟ is clearly at variance with the earlier assertion that at the moment of the big bang the universe „appeared spontan-eously, starting off in every possible way,‟ and then subsequently sentient beings somehow „choose‟ or „create‟ for themselves which universe they will occupy through the exercise of perceptual weeding out of possibilities. This perspective clearly requires that at the moment of „creation‟ there must be a quantum field of infinite potentiality which contains its own mechanism of unfoldment, rather than a pure „nothingness‟ which Hawking and Mlodinow seem to favor. Furthermore this universal field must be of the nature of consciousness-awareness. The conclusion that the ultimate nature of the universal process must be of the nature of consciousness follows exactly from Hawking and Mlodinow‟s adherence to Feyman‟s „sum over histories‟ approach to quantum theory, which requires that: The histories that contribute to the Feynman sum don‟t have an independent existence, but depend on what is being measured. We create history by our observations, rather than history creating us.26 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 94 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution In other words it is the exercise of sentient „observation‟, or perception, which creates „our history‟, which also means that sentient perception determines the nature of the universal process backwards in time, and also forwards in time, through the weeding out of potentialities. Thus in their chapter „Choosing our Universe‟ Hawking and Mlodinow tell us that in one possible universal history the moon is made of „Roquefort cheese‟ but somehow the perceptual activities of the sentient beings of the current universe has vetoed this possibility and opted for a moonrock moon; although there may be other universes which do have a Roquefort cheese moon, the sentient beings in our universe have, over vast time over scales, „chosen‟ moonrock.27 This view agrees with the understanding of the visionary physicist John Wheeler, who also concludes that the evolution of the universe eventually requires the participation of sentient beings in the determination of its nature: Directly opposite to the concept of universe as machine built on law is the vision of a world self-synthesized. On this view, the notes struck out on a piano by the observer participants of all times and all places, bits though they are in and by themselves, constitute the great wide world of space and time and things.28 And: Law without law. It is difficult to see what else than that can be the plan of physics. It is preposterous to think of the laws of physics as installed by Swiss watchmaker to endure from everlasting to everlasting when we know that the universe began with a big bang. The laws must have come into being. Therefore they could not have been always a hundred percent accurate. That means that they are derivative, not primary … Events beyond law. Events so numerous and so uncoordinated that, flaunting their freedom from formula, they yet formulate firm form … The universe is a self excited circuit. As it expands, cools and develops, it gives rise to observerparticipancy. Observer-participancy in turn gives what we call tangible reality to the universe … Of all the strange features of the universe, none are stranger than these: time is transcended, laws are mutable, and observer participancy matters.29 A significant observation in this quote is that the universe „as it expands, cools and develops, it gives rise to observer-participancy. Observer-participancy in turn gives what we call tangible reality to the universe…‟ which indicates an interdependent evolutionary process which physicist Amit Goswami calls a „tangled hierarchy‟ within which the observing aspect and the observed aspect of the evolutionary process develop inter-dependently through a sequence of increasingly „explicate‟, or materialized, levels of manifestation. This viewpoint corresponds closely to the suggestion by the significant trailblazing physicist David Bohm who suggested that the appearance of the material world emerges through initially subtle levels of „implicate orders‟ which manifest through quantum layers, which he dubbed „implicate orders‟, towards a final „material‟ manifestation. As we shall see, this view of a vertical downward (or upward depending upon one‟s point of view) evolution through quantum levels of manifestation provides a much more coherent and fertile elucidation of the manner in which the common structures underlying the morphology of biological life came into being. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 95 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution In his book Life Without Genes Adrian Woolfson presents us with a poetic vision of the sort of field of potentiality that he imagines must have „existed‟ before the dawn of life within the universe: In the beginning there was mathematical possibility. At the very inception of the universe fifteen billion years ago, a deep infinite-dimensional sea emerged from nothingness. Its colourless waters, green and turquoise blue, glistened in the nonexistent light of the non-existent sun … A strange sea though, this information sea. Strange because it was devoid of location …30 This field, of course, can only be the quantum wavefunction of the universe, a universal wavefunction which contains: …all possible histories … through which the universe could have evolved to its present state…31 This perspective, of course, is completely harmonious with the Hawking-Mlodinow version; the quantum wavefunction of the universe contains all the future evolutionary possibilities for the development of sentient beings and the environments inhabited by then. And from out of the vast entangled web of infinite possibilities for manifestation only certain privileged, because viable within the context of the details of the evolution of this particular universe, members will actually make it into reality: An information space of this sort would furnish a complete description of all potentially living and unrealizable creatures…32 The fact that not all possibilities for the manifestation of sentient beings and the environments inhabited by them are actualized, thereby leaving some potentialities as „unrealized‟ is, again, in line with the Hawking-Mlodinow perspective, wherein many potentialities, the unlikely possibility of a cheese-moon being an example given by them, are weeded out by the choices that the universal consciousness, which at some point becomes embodied within evolved sentient beings, makes along the way. The dramatic implication, then, is that the potential forms of all sentient beings must be „contained‟ as pure potentiality within the ground of the universal quantum consciousness which awaits unfoldment at the edge of time. The attitude to the notion that the quantum level of reality, the level which just about all physicists now consider to the ultimate and grounding level, is at least inextricably entangled with the phenomenon of consciousness (Rosenblum and Kuttner – Quantum Enigma) or, even more radically, consists of a field of pre-individualized awareness-consciousness (Stapp, Goswami, Hameroff and others), on the part of those who lean towards a materialist view of reality is ambiguous to say the least. The quantum evidence is now so now ineluctable that denying it is really not a viable option. However, an option often resorted to is to falsely claim that the quantum evidence is so confusing that the matter has not been decided yet. In a recent book called Life Ascending, which won the 2010 Royal Society Prize for Science Books, the author Nick Lane refers to the views of the Scottish physicist Graham CairnsSmith who suggests that what we call „matter‟ must itself have subjective features and must also in some fashion partake of the nature of consciousness, which was the position advanced by Bohm; Lane writes that: Matter is conscious in some way, with „inner‟ properties, as well as the familiar external qualities that physicists measure. Pan-psychism is taken seriously again. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 96 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution It sounds preposterous. But what arrogance to think that we know all there is to know about the nature of matter! We don‟t. We don‟t even understand the way quantum mechanics works. … We don‟t know enough about the deep nature of matter to know how neurons transform brute matter into subjective feelings.33 This passage illustrates the kind of intellectual schizophrenia which seems to be at the root of current thinking in biology and neurophysiology and other associated disciplines; and it is also necessary to point out in passing that the assertion that „we don‟t even understand the way quantum mechanics works‟ is completely untrue – we have a very precise understanding, it‟s just that most people don‟t like the quantum implication that consciousness is the primary constituent of reality. The inescapable fact is that the concept of „matter‟ has been thrown into dramatic ambiguity by quantum physics, so much so that the respected physicist Henry Stapp has repeated many times that Cartesian-Newtonian type matter „does not exist,‟ and physicist and respected science writer John Gribben has written a book entitled The End of the Matter Myth, not to mention pronouncements such as that made in 1931 by Max Planck that he regarded „consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness‟34, does not stop misguided biologists and others lamenting that they do not know how „brute matter‟ is „transformed‟ into „subjective feelings.‟ How can a non-existent, mythological assumed aspect of reality transform into anything? This is not to say that the material world is completely non-existent, this would be a ridiculous assertion. The point concerns the ultimate nature of what appears to be an „external‟ material world which is conceived of as being independent of mind. The evidence of quantum theory quite clearly is that what appears to be a sphere of materiality which has its own inner self-enclosed independent essence cannot actually be like this. Quantum theory unambiguously tells us that what we thought was independent „matter‟ is actually dependent upon mind. As quantum physicist Wojciech H. Zurek, the primary instigator of the theory of „quantum Darwinism,‟ a quantum viewpoint which is fundamental for understanding the Evo-devo evidence, tells us: Given almost any initial condition, the universe described by [the quantum wavefunction] evolves into a state containing many alternatives that are never seen to coexist in our world. Moreover, while the ultimate evidence for the choice of one alternative resides in our elusive “consciousness,” there is every indication that the choice occurs much before consciousness ever gets involved and that, once made, the choice is irrevocable.35 Although at first sight the implication of the quantum evidence might seem to be that individual consciousnesses „collapse‟ the wavefunction, in fact it is actually more correct to consider the appearance of the material world to be an inter-subjective process which operated at a much deeper quantum level that individuated consciousness, and, furthermore, prior to the manifestation of sentient beings within the process of evolution there must be an inner cognitive function within the field of potentiality which operates to unfold potentialities and thereby also unfold and evolve the future sentient beings destined to inhabit the unfolding universe. Nick Lane suggest that such a „pan-psychic‟ viewpoint is „preposterous‟ and, although he pays a brief lip-service to the fact that we do not know „all there is to know about the nature ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 97 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution of matter‟ he quickly falls back into the familiar, and for many cosy, materialist worldview of the pre-quantum, pre-twentieth century perspective, the perspective of gentlemen fossil collectors and intrepid explorers and species collectors of tropical rain forests. This tendency to constantly fall back into a default position of primary materialism, even whilst in the midst of making observations which should alert the writer in question to the fallacious nature of the perspective is astonishing. Lane, for example, in referring to the work of the neuroscientist Gerald Edelman, tells us that: Edelman refers to the process of brain development as neural darwinism, which emphasises the idea that experience selects successful neural combinations. All the basic tenets of natural selection are present; we start out with a massive population of neurons, which can be wired up in millions of different ways to achieve the same ends. The neurons vary amongst themselves and can either grow more robust or wither away; there is competition between neurons to form synaptic connections and differential survival on the basis of success.36 Here Lane at first reiterates the recent discovery of neuroplasticity, the fact that, contrary to what the vociferous „experts‟, again on the basis of prejudice and minimal evidence, in the field of neuroscience prior to the appalling Silver Spring Monkey experiments, the mind‟s intentionality is able to determine the wiring of the brain. In the Silver Spring experiments the nerve ganglia that supplied sensation to the brain from the monkeys‟ arms and legs were cut and various forms of encouragement, such as electric shocks, were used to force the monkeys to use the limbs they could not feel. Subsequently it was discovered that significant cortical remapping had occurred, showing that being forced to use limbs with no sensory input had triggered changes in their brains' organization. This evidence of the brain's plasticity helped overturn the widely held view that the adult brain cannot reorganize itself in response to intentional actions. Professor of Psychiatry Jeffrey Schwartz, in his excellent book The Mind and the Brain says of this discovery: Mind, we now see, has the power to alter biological matter significantly; that three pound lump of gelatinous ooze within our skull is truly the mind‟s brain.37 Lane, however, turns this perspective on its head and, in the same way that Dawkins gives an inappropriate ontologically privileged status to „selfish‟ genes, he gives the brain‟s neurons an equally inappropriate status, for as Stapp points out: …no such brain exists; no brain, body, or anything else in the real world is composed of those tiny bits of matter that Newton imagined the universe to be made of.38 By this dramatic assertion Stapp is emphasizing the fact that the quantum realm is primary; there is no „Newtonian‟ type matter, and therefore no ultimately existing self-sufficient neurons, in existence. The inappropriate positing of the „material‟ brain as being the ultimate source of the phenomenon of consciousness derives from the simplistic observation that there is an obvious connection between damage to various areas of the brain and consequent behavior: …specific brain injuries (lesions) cause specific reproducible deficits. It‟s hardly surprising, but a lesion in the same area causes the same deficit in different people, or for that matter in animals.39 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 98 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution However, as we shall see, this crude materialist assumption is incorrect. The fact that the brain is ultimately an apparent „material‟ organization which emerges from a deeper level of quantum functioning in no way undermines the apparent coherent „material‟ functioning of the quantum structure of the brain. It simply means that, at the level at which our „material‟ bodies and our sense faculties function, the coherent functioning of the ultimate quantum Mindnature, to employ a term of the Buddhist Dzogchen tradition, manifests as the apparently „material‟ world. But this does not mean that the evidence as to the ultimate quantum Mindnature of reality is false. The situation is that a deep implicate field of quantum awareness-consciousness organizes itself through a cascade of quantum „implicate orders‟ that finally produce the explicate structures of the brains of sentient beings in order to manifest as individuated consciousness within the manifested dualistic universe. David Bohm encapsulated this vision in his notion of the holomovement: …the notion of the holomovement was enriched by going from a three dimensional space to a multidimensional implicate order and then to a vast „sea‟ of energy in „empty‟ space, so we may now enrich this notion further by saying that in its totality the holomovement includes the principle of life as well. Inanimate matter is then to be regarded as a relatively autonomous sub-totality in which, at least as far as we know, life does not significantly manifest. … Indeed, the holomovement which is „life implicit‟ is the ground of both „life explicit‟ and of „inanimate‟ matter, and this ground is what is primary, self-existent and universal.40 This characterization of the universal ground of „life implicit‟, within which the potentialities for sentient beings and their environments have an origin bears an significant resemblance to the Buddhist Dzogchen account of the universal ground: The root of our material-mental universe is this self-existent pristine cognitiveness, a point instant virtual singularity; since its facticity is open-dimensioned and not discernable as any concrete thing, it is a meaning-saturated field as pristine cognitiveness. The radiation field of this open dimension is the intrinsic photic character of pristine cognitiveness. Since this is there as its own lucency (in its prismatic character) as yet undifferentiated into color values, it is the quasimirroring pristine cognitiveness. Since these modes of pristine cognitiveness have one and the same operational source, differing only in name, this facet is termed the selective mapping pristine cognitiveness. Since these modes of pristine cognitiveness are self-existent, identical with respect to their lucency and indivisible, this facet is termed the auto-reflexive identity pristine cognitiveness. Since by understanding correctly the meaning-value of this cognitive character of Being all intentional ideation is actualized spontaneously and this facet is termed the precisely actualizing pristine cognitions as the operational source of the intelligible universe that the eighty-four thousand portals to life‟s meaning opens up. 41 Here the unfolding principle which drives the evolution of the sentient beings both downwardly through implicate orders of manifestation, and also across time, is „pristine cognitiveness‟. This is the fundamental universal cognitive function which is able to trigger the quantum sea of potentiality into action, and through this action, which takes place over vast time scales, sentient beings of all possible varieties consistent with the nature of the manifesting universe come into being, each embodying a tiny quantum of the universal ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 99 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution „pristine cognitiveness‟ which provides the driving force for the evolution of the universe. Thus, as Bohm indicates, „life implicit‟ becomes both „life explicit‟ and „inanimate‟ matter. In the following elucidation the interconnections between the Dzogchen account, based on Herbert V. Guernter‟s excellent exposition Matrix of Mystery: Scientific and Humanistic Aspects of rDzogs-chen Thought, of how a fundamental field of 'pristine cognitiveness‟ materializes into individualized centers of dynamic meaning-experiencing, or sentient beings, and the account based on the quantum insights on the part of Bohm is uncanny. According to Bohm: We can say that human meanings make a contribution to the cosmos, but we can also say that the cosmos may be ordered according to a kind of „objective‟ meaning. New meanings may emerge in this over all order. That is we may say that meaning penetrates the cosmos, or even what is beyond the cosmos. For example there are current theories in physics that imply that the universe emerged from the „big bang‟. In the earliest phase there were no electrons, protons, neutrons, or other basic structures. None of the laws that we know would have had any meaning. Even space and time in their present well-defined form would have had no meaning. All of this emerged from a very different state of affairs. The proposal is that, as happens with human beings, this emergence included the creative unfoldment of generalized meaning. 42 Guenther describes the beginning phases of the evolution of the manifested and materialized world of dualistic experience from the „evolutionary zero point‟ according to the Dzogchen worldview as follows: It is excitatory intelligence that provides the necessary programming information for initiating a dramatic unfolding process (the big bang) tending towards ever greater degrees of complexity (the evolving universe) while simultaneously, throughout all its phases, retaining the intelligence that initiated the process. When this big bang occurs, the surging of intelligence-qua-isotropic radiation develops a special envelop-like structuring of radiation field…The unitary process as an envelop-like structure which results from this surging of intelligence is termed the meaningsaturated field as pristine cognitiveness. 43 At this point there is still no „matter‟, the appearance of the material world comes into manifestation at a later point of quantum evolution from the evolutionary zero point. What we are discussing at this level of development is the cascade of quantum templates of meaning-manifestation, levels of quantum downward evolution from the nondual zero point, levels that Bohm termed „implicate orders‟, each implicate order enfolds a new level of meaning evolution in a quantum descent into apparent materiality, and this descent requires the materialization of sentient beings as carriers of individualized awareness of a particular locus of meaning-awareness: Later, with the evolution of new forms of life, fundamentally new steps may have evolved in the creative unfoldment of further meanings. That is, we may say that some evolutionary processes occur which could be traced physically, but we cannot really understand them without looking at some deeper meaning which was responsible for the changes. The present view of the changes is that they are random, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 100 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution with selection of those traits that were suited for survival, but that does not explain the complex, subtle structures that actually occurred. 44 Here Bohm indicates the serious shortcomings of the materialistic and mechanistic view of the evolutionary process enshrined in the materialistic vision of the Darwinian evolutionary process. The view pugilistically promoted by Dawkins and Dennett for instance is that the universe has always been fully materialized and that evolution is nothing more that the nonintentional and mechanical activity of essentially lifeless matter, an extraordinarily counterintuitive, but for some incomprehensible reason, widely accepted belief. In contrast to this, now completely unacceptable, vision of the lifeless magically becoming life through blind mechanical churning of mindless bits and pieces of inert matter, Bohm is suggesting that evolution must be driven by an intentionality which acts towards the manifestation of life through increasingly more materialized levels of quantum potentiality. Evolution, according to Bohm, must essentially be an intentional quantum process by which subtle quantum structures cascade down to less subtle levels to eventually become fully „materialized‟. This process, according to Bohm, requires: 1. A set of implicate orders 2. A special distinguished case of the above set, which constitutes an explicate order of manifestation. 3. A general relationship (or law) expressing a force of necessity which binds together a certain set of the elements of the implicate order in such a way that they contribute to a common explicate end…45 And elsewhere he indicates a set of nested orders: explicate, implicate, super-implicate, super-super-implicate…. In the imagery of Dzogchen, as the „excitatory intelligence‟ manifests through the subtle or „implicate‟ quantum levels towards manifestation on a materialized level it creates „envelopes‟, which we can identify as quantum demarcation structures which designate boundaries which the cognitive process of materialization. These quantum „envelopes‟ thereby marks out areas of differentiation between the activity of subjective cognition and the projected stabilized cognized objects. In this way the „pristine cognitiveness‟ hides its unitary nature in an imaginational field of activity, a field of activity within which the possibilities for the evolution of sentient beings and the collective environments shared by the various varieties of sentient beings takes shape: This field envelope exhibits an intentional structure, constituted both as an intending act phase and an intended object phase…46 This account, which asserts that the cascade into manifestation begins at a deep subtle level of potentiality with the mere glimmer of quantum-intentional movement, prompted by the internal „pristine cognitiveness‟, a subtle quantum intentionality that produces the first implicate order of subtle intentional-subject and intended object, without any further content than this mere subtle intentional duality, easily melds with the most recent „quantum Darwinism‟ proposal that the nature of the quantum stuff of reality is epiontic: …quantum states, by their very nature share an epistemological and ontological role – are simultaneously a description of the state, and the „dream stuff is made of.‟ One might say that they are epiontic. These two aspects may seem ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 101 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution contradictory, but at least in the quantum setting, there is a union of these two functions.47 In this new quantum paradigm we find that the insight brought to modern Western philosophy by Bishop Berkeley that „to be is to be perceived‟ is now validated at the fundamental level of quantum theory. The epistemological act of perception actually creates a moment of ontology. And this does not mean that something already existing is known to be existing because of perception, it means, rather, that the very perceptual act creates the existence at the quantum level, one might say that the „collapse of the wavefunction‟ actually is one moment of quantum perception which itself is a moment of quantum ontology. Furthermore the epiontic paradigm indicates that repeated perception creates a resonant latency for the same perception to occur again, so the more often a perception is repeated the more probable it becomes. This process of „quantum Darwinism‟, which I have explored in detail in relation to various formulations in my article Bohm’s Implicate Order, Wheeler’s Participatory Universe, Stapp’s Mindful Universe, Zurek’s Quantum Darwinism and the Buddhist Mind-Only Ground Consciousness (JCER, Vol. 1 Issue 8), underlies Edelman‟s „neural Darwinism‟ as well as biological evolution over time, in the latter context it finds its most explicitly developed formulation in Rupert Sheldrake‟s proposal of the functioning of quantum morphogenetic fields. The Russian physicist and quantum philosopher Michael Mensky has also formulated a similar perspective. According to Mensky consciousness is an interior aspect or quality of the wavefunction which reflexively operates upon quantum potentialities for experiential existence. For individuated consciousness itself to become manifest from fundamental awareness as an explicit experiential aspect of reality it must bring an experienced world into being; and such a world is manifested through the actualisation of the potentialities within the wavefunction and the subsequent selection of primary experiential pathways. According to Mensky a crucial question which requires explication is why the alternatives which naturally arise are classical, or at least close to classical, in demeanour. Mensky gives the following account: If the picture of the world as it appears in consciousness were far from classical, then, due to quantum non-locality, this would be a picture of a world with „locally unpredictable‟ behaviour. The future of a restricted region in such a world could depend on events even in very distant regions. No strategy of surviving could be elaborated in such a world for a localised living being. Life (of the form we know) would be impossible. On the contrary, a (close to) classical state of the world is „locally predictable‟. The evolution of a restricted region of such a world essentially depends only on the events in this region or not too far from it. Influence of distant regions is negligible. Strategy of surviving can be elaborated in such a world for a localised living being.48 Entangled quantum phenomena can instantaneously affect each other over vast cosmic distances. In fact distance does not seem to be an issue for this kind of entangled mutual determination. It follows, therefore, that in a non-classical, quantum-entangled scenario there would be no environments wherein environmental behaviour was determined purely by local events. Such environments would not be locally coherent and predictable and consequently they could not support coherent life. If Mensky‟s argument is correct then the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 102 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution classical lineaments of a life-supporting manifested reality is fashioned by consciousness itself for its own manifestation! In quantum field theory there in a non-substantial entangled quantum field of potentiality and within the process that Mensky envisages it is through the operation of a primitive level of quantum consciousness that this entangled and interdependent field is localised through the quantum evolution of the „classical‟ world of individualised sentience and materiality. Furthermore, Mensky indicates that the level of consciousness at which the process begins is: …the most primitive, or the most deep, level of consciousness, differing perceiving from not perceiving.49 Such deep levels of consciousness contain shared structures of possible experience. These aspects of the structures of consciousness are coterminous with those that the analytic psychologist C.G. Jung called archetypes. Although Jung‟s archetypes are primarily concerned with deep emotional determinations of aspects of reality, his work led him to suggest, like Bohm, that there is a deep level of connection between the physical world and the realm of the subjective.50 This view of the deep inner and hidden connection between the manifest realms of the objective world and the subjective experiential world was also shared by physicist Wolfgang Pauli who corresponded for a time with Jung on the subject. The experiential templates for the material world, which can be thought of as archetypal templates which interact with the established features of the objective wavefunction that provides the potential for a material world, must be shared, at least in part, by all sentient beings. Mensky‟s account of how such deep structures of consciousness, which select the experiences conforming to a stable material world from the wealth of quantum possibility, arise in the first place provides a fertile starting point for the development of the view of evolution as an essentially quantum process which begins with the operation of the interior quantum „pristine cognitiveness‟ operating within the field of quantum potentialities. And the starting point, at the very base of the hierarchical cascade of implicate orders into material manifestation is the glimmer of the division into perceiver and perceived. Within this division into the possibility of observer and an observed, a fundamental division which takes place at a deep hidden quantum implicate level, the universe becomes self-referring and self-observing, a process which now gives rise to what Goswami calls a „tangled hierarchy‟, which can be compared to Bohm‟s cascade of „implicate orders‟, of selfobservation through which the fluid quantum nature of the fundamental ground becomes increasingly divided into quantum template „prototype‟ sentient beings and inhabited environments. These prototype quantum potentialities only „exist‟ as quantum potentialities until consciousness intervenes to fully materialise them, a process which Goswami and others suggest may occur backwards in time, a quantum viewpoint which means that evolution would be a far more bizarre and complex process than envisaged by the single dimensioned Darwinian perspective. For within this quantum perspective it would be the case that until sentient beings began to solidify the process of quantum evolution, backwards in time, the process would be only occurring at the quantum level. This scenario involves the possibility that vast ages prior to the Cambrian, for instance, would at that time only be quantum processes, a viewpoint which is consistent with the Hawking-Mlodinow metaphysical vision of the evolution of the universe and its inhabitants. As Goswami indicates: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 103 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Life and by implication we ourselves are here because of the way the universe is designed in possibility so we can collapse the possibility into manifestation.51 As we shall see, this perspective can bring coherent elucidation to some perplexing evolutionary conundrums such as the meaning of the Cambrian „explosion.‟ However, such a perspective seems seriously counter-intuitive and Nick Lane would almost certainly employ the term „preposterous‟ to describe it. But surely we have to decide whether we take the quantum evidence and implications seriously or not? This understanding of the nature of quantum evolution is consistent with the fact that in quantum field theory the ultimate quantum field contains no substantiality; there is only a field of potentiality which is „operated‟ upon by „creation‟ (and „destruction) operators. This description can easily be viewed as an „objective‟ presentation of the action of a fundamental „pristine cognitiveness‟, also termed within Dzogchen as an „excitatory intelligence‟, operating to unfold sentient potentialities. The very first glimmer of epiontic quantum perception, deep within the quantum ground, would simply be a movement of consciousness which gathers into a centre an intentional disposition for perception towards an aspect of the ground of reality which is interdependently posited as being that which is perceived. The first quantum implicate templates, therefore, would simply be that of perceiver-perceived, or „grasper‟ and „grasped‟ as Buddhist Mind-Only philosophy terms the division. At this point there is only the intention to produce a realm of dualistic experience embodied within a multitude of sentient beings, but as yet there is no actual full-blown perceiving going on. We are still in the early phases of quantum implicate manifestation and there is only the mere potentiality for a division into perceiving beings and perceived entities. The next movement towards manifestation would be to divide the perceiving aspect into actual varieties of perception: some form of sight or echo-location etc., hearing, smelling, touching, tasting. This step will be accompanied by the kind of objects which can be perceived according to which sense faculty and so on. Also there must be a determination as to mode of movement according to the potential environment. These determinations will begin at a very subtle „virtual‟ quantum level, and in this way the actual basic templates of possible sentient beings might be determined within quantum implicate orders prior to actual manifestation on the apparently „material‟ world. This process will cascade down, through many quantum implicate levels, or „orders‟, to ever more explicate „gross‟ levels of manifestation, until, of course, an actual teaming experiential dualistic interconnected manifold of perceiving creatures and concomitant perceived worlds is „created‟ from out of the epiontic field of quantum potentiality. Such a view accounts for aspects of evolution far more coherently than the currently accepted materialistic Darwinian paradigm and also for such anomalies as the Cambrian explosion. A good example to consider is the case of the distal-less gene which has been discussed above. As with the example of the Crayfish the distal-less gene complex has a remarkable range of applications. Conway Morris describes the situation as follows: As with Pax-6 the original function of this gene is not certain, but some evidence suggests that its primary role was linked with the development in the embryo of the nervous system, and especially the sensory organs. Now it so happens that in arthropods many of the sensory organs are located on the appendages, and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 104 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution accordingly when there was need for improved sensory perception so parts of the body protruded to extend the sensory range of the sensory cells. Only later were such outgrowths on occasion employed for such purposes as locomotion. The widespread expression of the gene distal-less is, therefore, effectively a reflection of the recurrent and independent of such limbs: in a sense distal-less hitchhikes as a sensory protrusions and is subsequently transformed to allow an additional function such as a leg or an antenna.52 So it appears that the same gene complex responsible for organizing protrusions for extending the range of sensory apparatus were „only later‟ „employed for such purposes as locomotion. The impression which is easily gleaned from such presentations is that there must be a sequence of animals across which a sense protrusion is, due to chance random mutation, gradually transformed into walking apparatus. But the notion that there could have been an intermediate animal which used the same protrusion to see and walk, or smell and walk or hear and walk etc. is clearly difficult to contemplate seriously. This sense of dissonance is even more pronounced with the transformation which is supposed to have taken place, via „natural selection‟, from gills to wings: The gill-to-will theory always had evidence in its favor (just not enough weight to settle the matter). But, if indeed insect wings came from crustacean gill branches, does this mean that some kind of crayfish or shrimp just crawled onto land and started flying? No, not at all. There were many evolutionary steps between animals that carried a set of respiratory appendages and the origin of powered insect flight on two pairs of wings as we know it today.53 But such a dogmatic and dubious belief in the power of gradualist „natural selection‟ cannot mask the fact that, if this account were to be correct, there must be a point in the evolution from gill to wing when the final creature in the evolutionary sequence abandoned the gill function completely and threw in its lot with a life on the wing; just as a few mutations back there must have been an animal using its wings for extracting the odd fix of oxygen from water. Does this sound plausible? The biologist Lisa Nagy has asked: Should vertebrate and insect limbs be considered homologous [meaning descended from a common ancestor] because they are patterned by similar gene networks? Or is the similarity an example of molecular convergence…54 In light of the discussion so far, however, the most plausible and coherent explanation of the phenomenon is that what Carroll calls „toolkit genes‟ reflects the fact that there are „toolkit‟ morphogenetic templates or prototypes for various modules of animal construction which reside as quantum „virtual‟ morphogenetic field modules within quantum implicate orders. Rupert Sheldrake describes the process of embryonic development as follows: The development of multicellular organisms takes place through a series of stages controlled by a succession of morphogenetic fields. At first the embryonic tissues develop under the control of primary embryonic fields. Then … different regions come under the influence of secondary fields, in animals those of limbs, eyes, ears etc. … Generally speaking, the morphogenesis brought about by the primary fields is not spectacular, because it establishes the characteristic differences between cells in ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 105 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution different regions that enable them to act as the morphogenetic germs of the organ fields. Then in the tissues developing under their influence, germs of subsidiary fields, fields which control the morphogenesis of structures within the organ as a whole…55 Thus the development of the embryo is controlled by a nested hierarchical of morphogenetic fields, which are, according to Sheldrake, „quantum probability fields‟56 akin to Bohm‟s implicate orders. This, of course, is exactly what we should expect in a quantum Evo-Devo universe; the development of the embryo cascades through hierarchical levels of quantum morphogenetic fields in the same way that evolution also took place through a sequence of quantum implicate orders. Figure 10 shows the very basic and partial beginnings of a hierarchical tree diagram indicating the kind of structure which one can conceive as underlying the upper implicate levels of the manifestation of various animals. The first division of the unified quantum ground is, as indicated above, the mere glimmer of perception; a movement of intentionality on the part of the universal „pristine cognitiveness‟ in the direction of producing a manifested world by unfolding as many of the potentialities, which are latent within the possibilities for sentient life contained within the ultimate field of potentiality, as is coherently possible. If the quantum Evo-Devo perspective is correct, then, in contrast to the neo-Darwinian materialist random-chance story in which the natural environment exists fully and materially formed prior to Life making a bid for survival, the true evolutionary process is one in which sentient beings and their environments evolve interdependently through quantum implicate levels. Thus the various requirements for body structure, sensory organs, means of movement dependent upon the environment and so no are fulfilled by the evolutionary process, both synchronically through quantum implicate orders and diachronically (over time), by a modular „pick and mix‟ process. The modular „design‟ of the Duckbilled Platypus is intriguing in this context. When the naturalist George Shaw, Keeper of the Department of Natural History at the British Museum, received a specimen from Captain John Hunter in Australia he remarked that it was “impossible not to entertain some doubts as to the genuine nature of the animal, and to surmise that there might have been practised some arts of deception in its structure.”57 Whilst it is true, of course, that at the fully manifested level all sentient beings inhabit the „same‟ material world in the sense that the quantum ground of potentiality within which all sentient beings exist has the same potentialities awaiting unfoldment, each type of sentient being will unfold a different continuum of experience of the „material‟ world. But all the possible worlds inhabited by the varieties of sentient beings are clearly consistent and coherent in their overlapping features. The entire interconnected system is a coherently inter dependent creation etched out of the potentialities within the ultimate quantum field of universal awareness. Darwin himself was not unfamiliar with the notion of an inter-dependent aspect within the process of evolution for at the beginning of his chapter The Struggle for Existence in his The Origin of Species we can read: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 106 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Fig 10 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 107 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution How have all those exquisite adaptations on the part of one organization to another part, and to the conditions of life, of one distinct organic being to another being been perfected? We see these beautiful co-adaptations most pleasantly in the woodpecker and mistletoe…58 It would have been impossible, of course, for Darwin to have been aware of the quantum origin. This view of the process of the unfolding of the multifarious possibilities within the quantum ground of reality through a universal unfolding of potential perceiving organisms can be immediately applied to some iconic Darwinian scenarios. We shall consider Darwin‟s finches and the African cichlids. The crucial Darwinian point concerning the Galapagos finches is that the beaks were supposed to have evolved by natural selection to fit the environmental surroundings, in this case the kind of nuts available being the evolutionary environmental factor (fig 11). This process is generally considered to have taken place gradually over a long time span due to random mutation. But the evidence gathered by researchers trying to support the neoDarwinian gradualist account actually undermines it: He describes the evidence they gathered demonstrating the correlation of beak size with food supply … and follows that with a good summary of the observations that the Grants made of beak size on the Island of Daphne Major after a drought. As the available supply of edible seed dwindled, only tough hard-to-open seeds were left, and only birds with larger, deeper beaks could eat them. Subsequent generations showed a dramatic increase in overall beak size in the population.59 This, however, does not indicate a mechanism which hangs around for a random mutation to ride to the rescue of the starving finches; it indicates an exquisitely tuned responsive interaction between the population about to inhabit an environment and the conditions of the environment immediately prior to the habitation by the subsequent generations. It is as if the experiences of the finches inhabiting the environment during the drought had left a trace within a deep level of the quantum field which then determined the form of the subsequent generations of finches. This corresponds exactly to Rupert Sheldrake‟s notion of a „morphogenetic field‟, a kind of memory within nature, and the Buddhist alayavijnana, the ground consciousness, and Bohm‟s „implicate order‟. All of these, of course, map onto the notion of the universal quantum field of reality. The way that such a mechanism could function is easily comprehended when one recalls that according to quantum theory it must be the case that all possibilities for manifestation are contained within the universal quantum wavefunction. This is the basis for the EverettDeWitt many-worlds theory of the functioning of reality, which says that all the possibilities within the universal wavefunction do actually happen in different experiential worlds. The Quantum Mindnature vision of the functioning of reality, which gives rise to a quantum Evo-Devo perspective asserts that whilst all the possibilities for the type of finch beak are contained within the universal wavefunction, which one is expressed depends upon the environmental conditions that the finches are about to be expressed into, so to speak. There is a „morphic resonance‟ between the implicate finch template about to manifest and the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 108 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution possibilities for manifestation such that the most appropriate manifestation for the environmental conditions occurs. This perspective is not only consistent with the current evidence, it also adds completion and depth were at the moment there is only detail. Work on the actual mechanism underlying the phenomenon of the morphing finch beak has been carried out by Dr. Cliff Tabin and a team of developmental biologists at Harvard Medical School. The key to the process was found to lie within the operation of the BMP4 (bone morphogenetic protein number 4) gene which signals for the production of the BMP4 protein. This gene turns out to be remarkably multitalented as it also coordinates the development of the embryo. Fig 10 In order to verify the significance of the BMP4 gene in the morphology of beaks the researchers artificially increased the production of BMP4 in chicken embryos and the beaks of the chicks became wider and more robust. Researchers also found that a different gene was responsible for the expression of another protein, calmodulin, which resulted in long probing beaks. So the operations of just two genes, which coordinate the expression to the amounts of two different proteins, appear to control the morphology of beaks. This leads to significant insights. New morphic forms can arise through the subtle operation of existing genes. It appears as if there is an overall template for a finch, for instance, which could be conceived of as being of the form of a Sheldrakian „morphogenetic field‟, which is then tweaked in its expression by the detailed operation of the genes underlying the template. Viewed from the perspective of Zurek‟s quantum Darwinism, it becomes clear that both the morphogenetic template field of the finch and the information which determines the actual expression of the details of the template, the exact form of the beak for instance, must reside in a quantum information field. This is clearly homologous to Bohm‟s notion of the implicate order. This is a dramatic insight bringing together crucial insights from cutting edge quantum theory and evolutionary biology, and we can only expect exciting developments are close at hand within this field. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 109 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution What is quite clear from the evidence so far, however, is that the materialistic notion of gradual step by step random mutation which is promulgated with pugilistic fervor by Richard Dawkins and others turn out to be completely false. The only reasonable picture that can be drawn in the light of all the evidence available clearly points to the „emergence‟ of the subjective perceiving aspect of the overall quantum process, together with the objective environmental container (the terms „container‟ and „contained‟ are used within Buddhist philosophy), in co-dependence on the overall interconnected field conditions. Such a coordinated co-arising through levels of quantum resonance is completely consonant with quantum non-locality. I hope that John Wheeler would have approved of my appropriation of his famous graphic image in figure 11 which illustrates this viewpoint. It has been suggested by some Evo-Devo enthusiasts that the emerging perspective clearly shows that some form of subtle teleology is clearly indicated within the process of reality. The form of this teleology, however, has yet to be explicated. The Quantum Mindnature perspective, with its assertion of the minimalist teleology of a self-perceiving function within the quantum ground of reality, as is clearly indicated by the phenomenon of the collapse of the wavefunction, provides exactly the form of teleology that is required to explain the developmental evolution at all levels, even that of the cosmos itself. Also, quite clearly this perspective completely elucidates the nature of the „goldilocks enigma‟ of the anthropic finetuning of the universe. Fig 11 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 110 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution Another „iconic‟ Darwinian phenomenon is that of the African fish called cichlids which have evolved into such a huge diversity of species that they have become one of the best known evolutionary radiations. The cichlids have evolved into a dramatic diversity of different shapes and sizes, with a variety of jaw types which are adapted for different kinds of foods. Research has shown that exactly the same process operates in this case as in the case of Darwin‟s finches. All of the different types of cichlid have the same gene profile but the astonishing diversity is produced by the expression of the basic gene profile into different forms according to the environmental opportunities. It seems that the same template will be expressed in any form which will fit into an environmental niche. This is exactly what one would expect of a creative self-perceiving universe which operates in order to maximize the number of perceiving organisms, of all possible types, according to the possibilities offered by the surrounding environments. This process, however, is not one in which the environment is fixed and given but, as we have seen previously, it is a process of interdependent co-origination between perceiving organisms and their environment. A simple analogy that Dawkins offers in order to illustrate the „sieving‟ process of the environment which he considers to be fundamental to „natural selection‟ is that of a hole which is able to sort balls into those bigger than it and those smaller: the result of one sieving process are fed into a subsequent sieving, which is fed into …, and so on.60 The random jiggling of the sea of endless possibility, thrown up by the chance workings of completely non-conscious, non-intentional molecular interactions is ordered, in small gradual steps, by the taming influence of the natural sieve (fig 12). Fig 12 Dawkins‟ Balls This picture, however, has one small, but vastly significant mistake. Where does the sieve come from? In the example of the balls and the hole, for instance, the hole is external to the random system of balls waiting to be ordered. The theory of evolution, if it is to claim an ultimate significance, should be self-contained, that is to say it should apply to the universe as a whole, without recourse to external agencies. This is, after all, exactly the kind of metaphysical requirement that Dawkins appeals to in his refutation of the notion of a creator ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 111 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution God. And the fact that Dawkins does consider his vision to have ultimate metaphysical relevance is clearly apparent; he tells us, for instance, that: Darwinism is true, not just on this planet but all over the universe wherever life may be found.61 The sieve, therefore, must be internal to and generated by the evolutionary process itself. The only other alternative is that the sieve is already in place, expectantly waiting for emergent life to make a bid for survival so to speak. The only metaphysically viable possibility is that the sieve is generated by the very process which Dawkins is trying to explain by means of the sieve; which means that the sieve must be itself generated by its own process of sieving! This might seem like a tall order, but in fact it is easily elucidated in the quantum Mindnature Evo-Devo perspective. The environment, which arises interdependently through the quantum Evo-Devo evolutionary process, is relatively stable in relation to the flexibility of perceiving organisms; this is indicated by figure 13. In this image we can see that the kind of evolutionary sieve that Dawkins requires can be generated by the evolutionary process itself. Fig 13 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 112 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution The process of a self-resonating, self-manifesting process of evolution which is depicted in fig 13 is a beautiful example of a process of dependent origination; both aspects, subjective and objective, of the manifestation arise in dependence upon the other. Indeed, as we have seen, Darwin himself was not unfamiliar with the notion of a co-dependent aspect within the process of evolution. At the end of his recent reworking of his controversial 1981 book A New Science of Life Rupert Sheldrake writes that: The hypothesis of formative causation is a testable hypothesis about objectively observable regularities of nature. It cannot explain the origination of new forms and new patterns of behaviour, nor can it explain subjective experience. Such explanations can be given only by theories of reality more far-reaching than those of natural science, in other words by metaphysical theories.62 If the formative causation hypothesis was to be shown to be correct by experimentation and observation, Sheldrake goes on to say, this would not mean that the materialist-mechanistic worldview would necessarily be shown to be invalid, it would, however, have to compete with other metaphysical theories. In this section we shall briefly examine how the Quantum Mindnature metaphysical perspective constitutes a precise and coherent account of how formative causation would naturally emerge from the internal perceiving operations at the quantum level. The following brief outline of Sheldrake‟s proposal is based on his own summary in A New Science of Life. He suggests the existence of morphogenetic fields which are responsible for molding the physical stuff of reality into the forms that it adopts. Morphogenetic fields provide: …further type of causation … responsible for the forms of all material morphogenetic units (sub-atomic particles, atoms, molecules, crystals, quasicrystalline aggregates, organelles, cells, tissues, organs, organisms). Form, in the sense used here, includes not only the shape of the outer surface of the morphogenetic unit but also its internal structure.63 The morphogenetic field which moulds any particular morphogenetic unit provides a „virtual form‟ which directs, through some natural mechanism (the inverse quantum Zeno effect) the way in which the physical „stuff‟ is organized. Inorganic morphogenesis is rapid but organic morphogenesis takes place through a hierarchy of levels (akin to Bohm‟s nested implicate orders) of developmental pathways, each pathway is called a „chreode‟. Thus the development of an organism takes place through the operation of a succession of nested morphogenetic fields. Morphogenetic fields are established over time through a process of „morphogenetic resonance‟ which depends on „patterns and structures of vibration‟64 Once the morphogenetic structure is established there is a continued action of morphogenetic resonance which stabilizes the unit and, furthermore, the stability of the morphogenetic field itself depends on the repeated manifestation of the morphogenetic unit it gives rise to, so there is an interdependent relationship between the morphogenetic field and its morphogenetic unit. This means that „phenomena become more probable the more often they occur.‟65 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 113 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution The isomorphism between Sheldrake‟s notion of morphogenetic fields and the probabilistic quantum wavefunction is quite clear: …morphogenetic fields are not precisely defined but are probability structures that depend on the statistical distribution of previous similar forms. The probability distributions of electronic orbitals described by solutions of the Schrödinger equation are examples of such probability structures, and are similar in kind to the probability structures of the morphogenetic fields of morphogenetic units at higher levels.66 Morphogenetic fields, then, are exactly the kind of quantum probability fields which would be created or built up by the kind of processes involved in the quantum Mindnature perspective. The close connection between the formative causation hypothesis and the quantum Mindnature perspective resides in the fact that it is the quantum process of repeated perception or activation at the quantum level that builds up the probability structures within wavefunctions; it is this internal quantum process, therefore, that creates morphogenetic fields. In other words morphogenetic fields can be considered to be classical level expressions of deep operations of the quantum level of consciousness. As we have seen the manifestation of the dualistic realm of experience takes place through a hierarchy of quantum levels, beginning with the merest spontaneous movement of the ground consciousness towards the activity of perception. This movement of universal intentionality, which is a naturally innate function of universal „empty‟ consciousness, has the effect of activating, and thereby strengthening the latencies of, the potentialities within the quantum ground of reality; once the process has begun the quantum process of manifestation cascades through increasingly more complex levels of manifestation. Sheldrake himself says that the hypothesis of formative causation itself does not explain the genesis of the cascade of the manifestation of the evolutionary process; it only describes the mechanisms involved once the process gets going: The action of the morphogenetic field of a morphogenetic unit on the morphogenetic fields of its parts, which are morphogenetic units at lower levels, can be thought of in terms of the influence of this higher level probability structure on lower level probability structures; the higher-level field modifies the probability structures of the lower-level fields.67 This process of higher-level fields controlling and modifying lower-level fields is, Sheldrake tells us, illustrated by the way in which molecules modify the fields of the atoms which make it up. The hierarchical morphogenetic field control mechanism underlies important biological phenomena such as protein folding. Furthermore the inverse Zeno effect which is involved in the operation of enzymes is exactly such a quantum phenomenon that seems to control a „classical‟ level manifestation. The evidence which has been claimed for the formative causation hypothesis is controversial and is generally discounted by mainstream workers in the field. And, because the power of the dominance of the materialist worldview is still overwhelming (which itself is surely an example of „the presence of the past!‟) the kind of evidence required in order to convince skeptics would have to be irresistible. This is because there seems to be a deeply ingrained ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 114 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution antagonistic prejudice towards theories which threaten materialistic approaches to understanding the process of reality. The approach adopted within the quantum Mindnature perspective in challenging the mechanistic-materialist worldview begins from a significantly different point because it takes the quantum evidence as it is now as the ground for developing a metaphysical overview, an overview which precisely coheres with all significant current quantum perspectives. As this work shows the breadth, scope and depth of the overarching and detailed metaphysical perspective is so dramatic that it is difficult to conceive of an alternative metaphysical perspective bringing together diverse areas of discourse together in such a detailed and precise manner. It was not anticipated at the outset, for instance, that the natural evolutionary development of the quantum Mindnature perspective itself would account for the process of evolution as well as otherwise unexplained phenomena within the field of evolutionary development. And one of the significant implications of this perspective is that something akin to formative causation must be operating at, and through, the quantum level. Sheldrake identifies four possible metaphysical theories which count account for the formative causation hypothesis: Modified Materialism: is definitely not a feature of the quantum Mindnature perspective. It is actually difficult to see how any kind of materialism can account for morphogenetic fields which are non-local. Quantum phenomena are, of course, non-local, but quantum phenomena are not „material‟ in the manner in which „classical‟ materialism conceives of „matter.‟ As Stapp says there is „no room‟ for „classical matter in a quantum universe. The conscious self: According to Sheldrake: The conscious self can be thought as not interacting with a machine, but with morphogenetic fields. These morphogenetic fields are associated with the body and depend on its physical and chemical states. But the self is neither the same as the morphogenetic field, nor does its experience simply parallel the changes brought about within the brain by energetic and formative causation. It „enters into‟ the morphogenetic fields, but it remains over and above them.68 The suggestion which Sheldrake makes for how the „self‟ can influence the physical body closely parallels Michael Mensky‟s viewpoint proposed in the Extended Everett Concept paper and it also incorporates elements of Stapp: …how does [the self] act upon the external world through morphogenetic fields? There are two ways in which it could do so: first, by selecting between different possible morphogenetic fields, causing one course of action rather than another; and second, by serving as the creative agency through which new morphogenetic fields come into being … In both cases it would act like a formative cause, but one that is, within limits, free and undetermined from the point of view of physical causation. It could indeed be thought of as the formative cause of causes.69 The creative universe: Sheldrake‟s version of the creative universe is based upon Henri Bergson‟s proposal of the élan vital, a vital spark at the core of reality driving the process of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 115 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution manifestation and evolution. The translation that Sheldrake makes of Bergson‟s term is „vital impetus‟, and quite clearly this perspective is completely in accord with the view developed within this work that the ground of reality has as an innate function of its own nature the mere requirement of perception of its own potentialities. The drive towards perception is exactly the élan vital driving the process of reality. As Sheldrake indicates this metaphysical viewpoint implies a hierarchy of levels of individuated consciousnesses: Such creative agencies could give rise to new morphogenetic fields by a kind of causation very similar to … conscious causation … In fact, if such creative agencies are admitted at all, then it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that they must in some sense be conscious selves.70 According to Sheldrake such a viewpoint cannot account for how or why the universal process got underway in the first place and does not provide a „goal‟ for the process. However, the metaphysical perspective proposed by the Quantum Mindnature Universe, which is based on the evidence of quantum theory, supplies the explanation of both genesis and „goal‟, although the goal is not achieved once and for all time but is, rather, a continuous process, by the same simple and natural observation: there is at the heart of the universal consciousness an inner pressure towards perception of the latent potentialities of the „empty‟ ground of reality. This pressure towards perception is evidenced in the ‟collapse of the wavefunction‟. As Sheldrake points out this perspective does not imply any independent „transcendent‟ creator. The creative force is simply an innate aspect of the universal process of reality. Transcendent reality: The notion of a transcendent creative agency is fraught with difficulty because of the different ways in which the term „transcendent‟ may be understood. Some presentations of this position leave the detailed delineation of the metaphysical structure of the „transcendence‟ being claimed conveniently ambiguous so that various dubious claims can be implied. The significant issue is whether the creative agency conceived of is asserted to be substantially and effectively independent of the realm of manifestation that it is supposed to be creator of. This is the position of most fundamentalist Christian beliefs which picture an independent God fashioning a separate domain for his created creatures, giving them a set of laws to follow and then stepping back to survey the disastrous results. For Buddhist philosophy such a simplistic picture is simply logically incoherent. If the supposedly „creative‟ agency were to be completely independent and separate of the creation, which is to say an absolutely and irrevocably different and separate nature, then it could not have any creative relationship with something that it is totally separate and independent of. The kind of „transcendence‟ which is incorporated into the quantum Mindnature perspective is the subtle Advaita (non-dual) metaphysical structure which asserts that there is an ultimately non-dual creative process of reality that creates a vast illusion of dualistic experience. From this perspective there is not so much a „creation‟ as a continuous process of creating on the part of the non-dual creative ground. The details of this perspective, as shown in this work, are remarkably subtle; one of the subtleties being the fact that the sentient being caught up in the dualistic play of illusion are themselves agents of the creative force. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 116 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution If we construe the phrase „transcendent conscious being‟ in following passage as referring to the non-dual creative aspect of an interdependent and interconnected process of reality, Sheldrake‟s characterization of the notion of transcendent reality comfortably applies to the quantum Mindnature universe: If this transcendent conscious being were the source of the universe and everything within it, all created things would in some sense participate in its nature. The more or less limited „wholeness‟ of organisations at all levels of complexity could then be seen as a reflection of the transcendent unity on which they depended, and from which they are ultimately derived.71 Such a view precisely applies to the metaphysical position developed in detail within this work. The illusory and limited sense of selfhood that is part of the dualistic experience of non-enlightened sentient beings is precisely a reflection and embodiment of the unity of nondual creative source and, furthermore, the change of state from the unenlightened perspective to an enlightened perspective is itself an illusion though which the illusion of separation dissolves. This subtle Advaita metaphysics of a transcendent and immanent reality embraces and includes the previous two positions of „conscious selves‟ (although they are ultimately illusory) and the „creative universe‟: …this fourth metaphysical position affirms the causal efficacy of the conscious self, and the existence of a hierarchy of creative agencies immanent within nature, and the reality of a transcendent source of the universe.72 The Quantum Mindnature metaphysical perspective developed in this work on the basis of all the currently available quantum evidence and interpretations provides exactly such a metaphysical perspective which elucidates and explains how the mechanisms of formative causation would be produced through the epiontic operations of the quantum levels of the universal ground consciousness which is the quantum Mindnature Matrix of the Universe. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 117 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution 1 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p5 Dawkins, R. The Blind Watchmaker 3 Dennett, D. Darwin’s Dangerous Idea p27 4 Dawkins, R. The Extended Phenotype p5 5 Endless Forms p72 6 Endless Forms p9 7 Dawkins, R. Reweaving the Rainbow p213 8 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 54 9 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 72 10 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 72 11 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 61 12 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 64 13 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 65 14 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 69 15 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 70 16 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 208 17 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p 290 18 Foster P. L. (1993) „Adaptive Mutation: The Uses of Adversity‟ in Annual Review of Microbiology Vol 47 p467-504 19 Conway-Morris, Simon (2003). Life’s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe. Cambridge, p 148 20 New York Review of Books 21 Dawkins, Richard (2006). Unweaving the Rainbow p50 22 McFadden, J. Quantum Evolution 23 Das Wesen der Materie” (The Nature of Matter), speech at Florence, Italy, 1944 (from Archiv zur Geschichte der MaxPlanck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 11 Planck, Nr. 1797) 24 Schrödinger, E. (1944). What is Life p121. 25 Interview with Goswami – in What Is Enlightenment. 26 See Hawking and Mlodinow - The Grand Design p140 27 See Hawking and Mlodinow -The Grand Design p140 28 Barrow, John D., Davies, Paul C. W., Harper, Charles L. (eds) (2004) p577 – Wheeler, J A (1999) „Information, physics, quantum: the search for links.‟ In Feynman and Computation: Exploring the Limits of Computers, ed A. J. G. Hey, p309 (314). Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. 29 Wheeler quoted in Barrow, John D., Davies, Paul C. W., Harper, Charles L. (eds) (2004) p73 – Freeman J. Dyson: „Thought-experiments in honor of John Archibald Wheeler.‟ 30 Woolfson, Adrian (2000). Life Without Genes, p74 31 Barrow, D. John & Tipler, Frank J. (1986). The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. p105 32 Woolfson, Adrian (2000). Life Without Genes, p76 33 Lane, Nick (2010). Life Ascending. Profile Books. p252 34 The Observer (January 25th, 1931) 35 Zurek Wojciech H – „Decoherence and the Transition from Quantum to Classical‟ – Revisited p4 36 Lane, Nick (2010). Life Ascending. Profile Books. p247 37 Schwartz, Jeffrey M. & Sharon Begley (2003) p369 38 Stapp, Henry (2007) p139 39 Lane, Nick (2010). Life Ascending. Profile Books. p240 40 Bohm, David (2003). The Essential David Bohm ed Nichol, Lee (Routledge, London) p102 41 Guenther, Herbert, V. (1984). Matrix of Mystery, Shambhala. p52 42 Bohm, David (2003). The Essential David Bohm ed Nichol, Lee (Routledge, London) p180 43 Guenther, Herbert, V. (1984). Matrix of Mystery p51 44 Bohm, David (2003). The Essential David Bohm ed Nichol, Lee (Routledge, London)p180 45 Bohm, David (2003). The Essential David Bohm ed Nichol, Lee (Routledge, London) p103 46 Guenther, Herbert, V. (1984). Matrix of Mystery p51 47 Barrow, John D., Davies, Paul C. W., Harper, Charles L. (eds) (2004) p136 – Wojciech H. Zurek: „Quantum Darwinism and envariance.‟ 48 Rosenblum, Bruce and Kuttner, Fred (2006). Quantum Enigma. p179 49 Mensky, Michael: „Reality in quantum mechanics, Extended Everett Concept, and Consciousness‟ p6 50 Jung, C.G.(1977) p538 51 Goswami, Amit (2008). Creative Evolution, Quest Books, p113 52 Conway-Morris, Simon (2003). Life’s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe. Cambridge, p 148 p242 53 Carroll, Sean B. (2006). Endless Forms Most Beautiful p176 2 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 118 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 078-118 Smetham, G. P. Quantum Mindnature Matrix: Mechanisms of Formative Causation of Evolution 54 Nagy in American Zoologist Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p136 56 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p104 57 http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/Hoaxipedia/Duckbilled_Platypus/ 58 Darwin, Charles (1859) 59 Jonathan Wells and Darwin‟s Finches. 60 Dawkins, Richard (2006) The Blind Watchmaker p45 61 Dawkins, Richard (2006). The Blind Watchmaker 62 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p237 63 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p143 64 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p144 65 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. – Back cover blurb 66 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p145 67 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p105 68 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p240 69 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p241 70 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p243 71 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p244 72 Sheldrake, Rupert (2009). A New Science of Life (Revised Edition). Icon Books. p244 55 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 377-378 Moodey, R. W. Brief Commentary on Nixon's “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience” 377 Commentary Brief Commentary on Nixon's “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience” Richard W. Moodey* ABSTRACT This is a brief commentary on Nixon’s “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience”. Key Words: conscious experience, unconscious experience. Nixon (2010) says that his aim in “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience: The Continuum of Experience,” is “to demonstrate that the terms experience and consciousness are not interchangeable” (p217). He explores meanings different thinkers attribute to “experience,” “consciousness,” and to the ways forms of these words can be combined. He concludes (p227) by suggesting that “the distinction between conscious experience (aka consciousness) and experience as such is well worth making.” I agree. Even before reading his essay, I believed that the distinction is valid. But I disagree that “the idea remains the same” [the idea of experience as such] if we were to “call it unconscious experience, consciousness without mind, core consciousness, or experience without a subject.” For me, the same kind of distinction holds between “unconscious experience” and “experience” as holds between “conscious experience” and “experience.” In both cases, unmodified “experience” is the broader category, and it is made narrower by the addition of either modifier. I have different reasons for disagreeing with the phrases “consciousness without mind” and “experience without a subject.” I see them both as self-contradictory, and thus can’t use them to refer to the same idea as “experience as such,” which I do not see as being self-contradictory. I don’t know what Nixon means by “core consciousness,” and thus have a hard time understanding how he can mean by it the same thing that he means by “experience as such.” He asks, “What is it like to be a bat, to have non-conscious experience?” When I imagine what it might be like to be a bat, I don’t imagine my bat-like experience to be totally unconscious, even though I don’t imagine my “bat-self” to have the same kind of experience I do. I believe that a bat is conscious when it is flying around catching bugs, and unconscious much of the time it is hanging upside-down in its cave. But, of course, as Nixon points out in earlier in the essay, the bat will neither agree or disagree with me. “Radical constructivism,” Nixon writes, “has suffered criticism because naïve skeptics ask, ‘You mean the world out there is like that because we make it so?” (p228). I am a skeptic, though I don’t like to admit that I am naïve. I suspect that my critical realist stance in philosophy accounts for many of the disagreements with the positions taken by some of the authorities Nixon cites, and with some of the propositions Nixon himself asserts. For example, he (p221-222) attributes to Martin Jay the claim that “Schopenhauer, Heidegger, Benjamin, Adorno, Bataille, Foucault, Barthes, and possibly Oakeshott, Dewey, and the trickster of text, Derrida” approve of the notion of “experience without a subject.” Of course, they might have “approved” of this notion somewhat in the same way that I approve of the notion of unicorns. I Correspondence: Richard W. Moodey E-mail: moodey0001@gannon.edu ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 377-378 Moodey, R. W. Brief Commentary on Nixon's “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience” 378 don’t believe they really exist, but “approve” of their use in stories. But if their approval means that these eminent men once believed that an experience can actually occur without there being an experiencing subject, then I passionately disagree with them. Nixon, however, seems to be much more willing than I am to praise these famous men for their approval of this notion. References Nixon, G. M. (2010). From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness: The Continuum of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 1(3): 216-233. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 379-380 Pereira Jr., A. Hollows of a Science of Consciousness? 379 Commentary Hollows of a Science of Consciousness? Alfredo Pereira Jr.* ABSTRACT I consider Nixon’s essay a well thought discussion of the possibility of a genuine science of consciousness. Most of the sections are worth discussing, but to find the main message it may be necessary to read between the lines. The good news is that he does not present true impossibilities for this science, but his discussion leads to the (sound) conclusion that it would have to account for many unconscious factors that make us creative and human. Key Words: consciousness, science, hollows. In the well crafted article “Hollows of Experience”, Nixon (2010) begins by stating: “The fundamental division in approaches to the question of consciousness is whether the brain creates experience or experience the brain.” (p.8). These alternatives are illustrated by the classical Materialist and Idealist approaches in Philosophy and Psychology. However, there is no ‘a priori’ reason to rule out the possibility of conscious activity being determined by the brain and, in turn, influencing brain activity. One of the main attempts to formulate and defend such a “co-evolutive” view is T. Deacon’s book “The Symbolic Species”, acknowledged by Nixon. He prefers to emphasize the dichotomy, possibly because the Idealist alternative would make it difficult – if not impossible – to build a Science of Consciousness, in the context of current scientific standards of “objectivity”. Some kinds of Idealism are incompatible with science, but not exactly because they hold that consciousness controls the brain. This possibility is perfectly admissible for non-Idealists, maybe not for radical Materialists. The problem (of our scientific standards) with Idealism arises when supernatural forces are assumed to express themselves by means of the individual’s body and even control his/her brain. In the second section, he departs from the assumption that “When experience becomes conscious, it has itself become an object. No longer one with the environment, we now feel ourselves as distinct from it, opposed to it. In the same way, we become aware of ourselves in the world and self itself is objectified” (p.9). I disagree with this proposed semantics of “experience” and similarity of conscious experience with such an (introspective) objetification. Alternatively, I take “conscious episodes” to refer to content experienced by a subject in present time, and “experience” as the interaction of the individual’s body, brain and environment (Pereira Jr. and Ricke, 2009). In this view, what conscious activity does is to individualize episodes in time, making them available to subjective experiences, which are then conceived as embodied (in the individual’s material structure) and embedded (in the environment). Our differences regarding these basic concepts are subtle, but make a difference for the discussion of what would be a science of consciousness. Instead of thinking of consciousness as “the arbiter of all realities”, I view it as a sequence of snapshots in a sea of unconscious experiences. In this regard, I wonder which of the two concepts of consciousness above are better fit by Merleau-Ponty’s quoted phrase, “the sensible hollowing itself out”. Correspondence: Alfredo Pereira Jr., Adjunct Professor, São Paulo State University, Botucatu, SP, Brasil E-mail: apj@ibb.unesp.br ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 379-380 Pereira Jr., A. Hollows of a Science of Consciousness? 380 Jumping to the last section - appropriately called “The Hollows of Experience” - I find Nixon attributing the origin of human and non-human creativity to unconscious experiences, not to the conscious tip of the iceberg. This seems to be in contradiction with his initial conception of consciousness. Then he proposes a change: “This is not to abnegate “I” consciousness but to suggest instead another way of being conscious, one that allows for both vital experience and for awareness of that experience.” (p.40). OK, Greg, but let me ask: did you find this conclusion only after writing most sections of the paper? If you knew it from the start, why begin with the “I-consciousness” view? At the end of the paper, Nixon tries to picture - with Heidegger - biology and technology as enemies to an authentic understanding of consciousness: “we may choose to define consciousness as a biological byproduct isolated from primordial experience and so continue to forge a future guided by the triumph of technology…As much as the symbolic mode of being conscious allows us to guide our own autopoiesis, I choose instead — and I hope others do, too — a conscious return to the hollows of experience.” Here I just recall that some authors – maybe Merleau-Ponty and Maturana/Varela themselves – have a different view of biological processes and others have a less pessimistic view of the effects of technology (e.g., in the emerging field of “artificial consciousness”). In conclusion, I consider Nixon’s essay a well thought discussion of the possibility of a genuine science of consciousness. Most of the sections are worth discussing, but to find the main message it may be necessary to read between the lines. The good news is that he does not present true impossibilities for this science, but his discussion leads to the (sound) conclusion that it would have to account for many unconscious factors that make us creative and human. References Nixon,G. M. (2010) Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. Pereira Jr., A. and Ricke, H., 2009. What is Consciousness? Towards a Preliminary Definition. Journal of Consciousness Studies 16(5), 28-45. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 474-475 Smith, S. P. Review of Bruce H. Lipton's Book: The Biology Of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter and Miracles 474 Book Review Review of Bruce H. Lipton's Book: The Biology Of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter and Miracles Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT I found Lipton's "The Biology of Belief" very readable, and worth reading. He is brave to say what he believes. Lipton describes "smart" cells, some perhaps living in a petri dish. Their collective properties are found smart. Lipton also presents his ground breaking ideas on epigenetics, a body of study that looks at the impact the environment has on controlling our genes. Further, Lipton also deals with cell membrane, quantum mechanics plus more. You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Biology-Belief-Unleashing-ConsciousnessMiracles/dp/0975991477/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: biology, belief, consciousness, miracle. In chapter 1, Lipton describes "smart" cells, some perhaps living in a petri dish. Their collective properties are found smart. Rather than a blind competition, what is discovered is a novel collective behavior leading to multi-celled organisms. In Lipton's (page 40) words: "to survive at such high densities, the cells created structured environments. These sophisticated communities subdivided the workload with more precision and effectiveness than the ever-changing organizational charts that are a fact of life in big corporations. It proved more efficient for the community to have individual cells assigned to specialized tasks." And Lipton finds favor in Lamarck's account of evolution. He (page 42) writes: "Not only did Lamark present his theory fifty years before Darwin, he offered a much less harsh theory of the mechanisms of evolution. Lamarck's theory suggested that evolution was based on an `instructive,' cooperative interaction among organisms and their environment that enables life forms to survive and evolve in a dynamic world." In chapter 2, Lipton present his ground breaking ideas on epigenetics, a body of study that looks at the impact the environment has on controlling our genes. Lipton observes that DNA is not self activating, a direct contradiction of the Central Dogma where information flows out of DNA but not back into DNA. Proteins are found necessary for activating DNA, but they are affected by the environment. Lipton (page 67) writes: "epigenetic research has established that DNA blueprints passed down through genes are not set in concrete at birth. Genes are not destiny! Environmental influences, including nutrition, stress and emotions, can modify those genes, without changing their basic blueprint. And those modifications, epigenticists have discovered, can be passed on to future generations as surely as DNA blueprints are passed on via the Double Helix." The cell membrane, with its protein channels and switches, is described in Chapter 3. Lipton (page 86) writes: "In contract ro conventional wisdom, genes do not control their own activity. Instead it is the membrane's effector proteins, operating in response to environmental signals picked up by the membrane's receptors, which control the `reading' of genes so that worn-out proteins can be replaced, or new proteins can be created." Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 474-475 Smith, S. P. Review of Bruce H. Lipton's Book: The Biology Of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter and Miracles 475 Lipton's chapter 4 is about quantum mechanics. Upon first reading chapter 4 I felt that Lipton's account was trendy, with his account of reality as a relational flux of change that is typical to some New Age interpretations of quantum mechanics. Nevertheless, Lipton ideas about vibrations began to sink in after some reflective oscillations. Lipton (page 117) writes "the behavior of energy waves is important for biomedicine because vibrational frequencies can alter the physical and chemical properties of an atom as surely as physical signals like histamine and estrogen." Lipton is not alone in these speculations involving quantum mechanics. I have myself used a threeness property in my book, "Trinity", to help resolve energy as a felt vibrations in the context offered by quantum mechanics; threeness permits a return to something less relational, less trendy Chapter 5 relates directly of the impact of belief on biology. This includes a treatment of emotions, as feeling the language of cells (the subconscious). Lipton (page 133) writes, "the actions of the subconscious mind are reflexive in nature and are not governed by reason or thinking." Lipton looks deeper into the placebo effect, and how it relates to his theory. Chapter 6 treats growth and protection behaviors. Stress is said inhibit growth mechanisms, impacting our vitality. To much fear can be soul-sapping. Lipton stresses the importance of conscious parenting in his last chapter. Lipton (page 178) gives this bit of advice: " You are personally responsible for everything in your life, once you become aware that you are personally responsible for everything in your life. One cannot be `guilty'of being a poor parent unless one is already aware of the above-described information and disregards it. Once you become aware of this information, you can begin to apply it to reprogram your behavior. " I won't force personal responsibility on my readers by telling you what the "above-described information" is all about, as it remains your free personal choice to read Lipton's fine book. References Bruce H. Lipton, 2005, The Biology Of Belief: Unleashing the Power Of Consciousness, Matter and Miracles, Mountain of Love. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

180 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness Essay Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness Michael Cecil* ABSTRACT The following essay postulates the existence of a non-spatial—and, thus, species nonspecific—3rd dimension of consciousness beyond the consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟; a dimension of consciousness within the context of which the current paradigm of the („classical‟) “science of consciousness” is to be understood as a „special case‟ (focusing exclusively upon the consciousness of the „thinker‟) of a more all-inclusive description of consciousness based upon the acknowledgement of three rather than only one dimension of consciousness. This description of consciousness extends the range of applicability of the „classical‟ “science of consciousness” to Jungian psychology and, for example, animal presentiment and telepathy. Key Words: consciousness, self, thinker, non-spatial, non-temporal. I. Jungian Psychology, Animal Telepathy & the “Science of Consciousness” The original goal of classical physics was to establish the fundamental laws for describing the structure and contents of the space-time physical reality, rather than merely to maintain and preserve the paradigm of classical physics itself as the reigning paradigm for the determination of all physical theory. And it was for this reason that the classical physicists of the early-to-mid 20th century—who, interestingly enough, placed much more importance upon the development of an all-inclusive physical theory than upon merely the preservation of classical physics—widely, but not immediately, acknowledged the validity of both the Michelson-Morley experiment and the discoveries of Einstein and Heisenberg. In other words, in order that the original goal of classical physics be achieved at all, it was eventually found to be necessary to set aside classical physics itself in favor of a much more inclusive physical theory with a much wider range of applicability; a physical theory including classical physics, relativity theory and quantum mechanics. Similarly, the ultimate goal of science is to achieve an all-inclusive description of both the physical reality and the totality of human (and animal) consciousness and experience, rather than merely to maintain and preserve the scientific method as the unassailable and reigning paradigm for the complete and accurate description of the physical-conscious reality. In other words, just as it eventually became necessary to acknowledge both relativity theory and quantum mechanics in order to more closely achieve the original goal of classical physics to establish a complete physical theory, it may very well also be necessary to set aside the entire paradigm (and the fundamental rules) of the scientific method itself in order to actually achieve, not merely in theory but in reality, the ultimate goal of science; that is, an allinclusive understanding of both the physical and the conscious reality which includes information which is as different from, and outside the paradigm and conceptual boundaries Correspondence: Michael Cecil, http://science-of-consciousness.blogspot.com E-mail: mececil@sbcglobal.net ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 181 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness of the scientific method as relativity theory and quantum mechanics are different from and beyond the frame of reference of classical physics. (In other words, it is, perhaps, the very assumptions, pre-conceptions and psychological-conceptual structures of the scientific method itself—for example, the uni-directionality of time in a forward direction, and the „spatiality‟ of consciousness itself to only the “self”, the „thinker‟, and the members of the human species—which are now providing the main stumbling blocks to revolutionary developments in both theoretical physics and the understanding of both human and animal consciousness.) Thus, the existence of, in particular, the “science of consciousness” within the framework of the scientific method necessarily raises an important question crucial not only to the very development of the “science of consciousness” itself; but, also, to the very future of the scientific method as the reigning paradigm for the most complete and accurate description of both the physical and the conscious reality: What, precisely, is the ultimate goal of any („classical‟) “science of consciousness”? Is that goal merely to arrive at an understanding of consciousness from strictly within the framework of the scientific method itself—that is, to maintain and preserve the status of the scientific method as the only paradigm capable of providing a complete and accurate understanding of both human and animal consciousness and experience? Or is its purpose, instead, to actually acquire a much deeper understanding of consciousness than that which can be provided by the scientific method; that is, an understanding which also includes information from outside of a rigidly scientific paradigm, but which is just as important to the understanding of the entirety of human and animal consciousness and experience as was the inclusion of relativity theory and quantum mechanics in the development of a much more inclusive physical theory? Now, to begin with, it must be acknowledged that both the scientific method and the “science of consciousness” originate in the consciousness of the „thinker‟, and the assumption that the consciousness of the „thinker‟ is both the fundamental datum of human experience and the „inertial frame of reference‟ for the complete and accurate description of both the entire physical and conscious reality; a consciousness and an assumption which, in turn, are based upon the metaphysical duality and the philosophy of Descartes. And it is on this basis that the findings of, especially, Jung and the other archetypal psychologists with regards to the consciousness of the “self” (see, for example, the opening passages of the Second Meditation of Descartes) are, to this day, widely trivialized, disregarded and ignored (but no less so than the findings of Reverse Speech Analysis and Parapsychology) as being „unscientific‟; and, thus, utterly and completely irrelevant to any emergent “science of consciousness”. In other words, it was only natural that, from its very inception from within the conceptual framework of Cartesian philosophy and the scientific method, the “science of consciousness” deny, trivialize and ignore the reality of the consciousness of the “self” (and its obvious relevance to the understanding of human consciousness, if not the establishing of, specifically, a “science” of consciousness) and focus, instead, almost exclusively on the consciousness of the „thinker‟; the real question now being whether the scientists of consciousness will continue to “circle the wagons” (by focusing exclusively on the consciousness of the „thinker‟ and its scientific descriptions of, exclusively, human consciousness), or whether the information with regards to the consciousness of the “self” will, instead, be acknowledged, considered, and incorporated within a more inclusive „science‟ of consciousness as being no ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 182 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness less crucial to the development of a much more complete understanding of consciousness than can occur within the frame of reference of, exclusively, the („classical‟) “science of consciousness” and the (human) consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟. But there is, in fact, a much more serious problem (than even acknowledging the reality of the consciousness of the “self”) which must be encountered by any “science of consciousness” which seriously purports to describe the entirety of both human and animal consciousness; even a „science‟ of consciousness which has become more complete (even if less „scientific‟ or „classical‟) by acknowledging, also, the reality of the consciousness of the “self”. And that has to do with those findings of Reverse Speech Analysis and Time Symmetrical Quantum Mechanics (in the context of, literally, decades of research demonstrating the validity of precognition, extra-sensory perception and/or clairvoyance in humans as well as animals; see, for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yo0gyXZQv0o&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0V6KBzIhu4&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYkoQ9WnwAM&feature=related ) which clearly demonstrate the existence of information which, although of immediate relevance to the understanding of consciousness, not only flies in the face of both the fundamental assumptions of the scientific method and the “science of consciousness”; but, also, threatens the very existence of the consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟ itself which is based upon the assumption of both the uni-directionality of time and the „spatiality‟ of consciousness to only the “self”, the „thinker‟, and the members of the human species. And what I have observed over the past few years is that the fundamental goal of those presently involved in the “science of consciousness” is certainly not to develop any allinclusive understanding of human (to say nothing of animal) consciousness; but, rather, to merely preserve the scientific method itself (and, not coincidentally, to prevent their own consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟ from collapsing into psychosis); which necessarily requires the trivialization of the reality of not only the consciousness of the “self” (which, of course, is the consciousness that experiences psychosis in the first place); but, also, a non-spatial (or 2-dimensional „flat‟ space)—and, thus, species non-specific—timeindependent consciousness; the existence of which is made necessary by the findings of Reverse Speech Analysis, Time Symmetrical Quantum Mechanics and Parapsychology. In other words, the only description of consciousness which is, in any way, seriously capable of actually achieving the ultimate goal of the “science of consciousness” in the description of both human and animal consciousness is a description of consciousness which is based upon the acknowledgement that there are not merely one or two; but, in fact, three dimensions of consciousness: 1) the consciousness of the „thinker‟—symbolized by the “fig leaves” in Genesis 3:7 (see, also, Saying #37 in the Gospel of Thomas), and by the Third Seal (6:5-6) and the “beast of the earth” in Revelations 13:11 and Sura 27:82 of the Quran; 2) the consciousness of the “self”—symbolized by the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” in Genesis 3:3-6, and by the Second Seal (6:3-4) and the “beast of the sea” in Revelations 13:1 (which, together with the consciousness of the „thinker‟, comprise the dualistic or „fallen‟ consciousness); and, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 183 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness 3) a non-dualistic, 2-dimensional „flat‟ space—and, thus, species non-specific—timeindependent, “observing consciousness” Created „by and in the image of God‟ (Genesis 1:27)—represented by the “Tree of Life” in Genesis 3:24 which symbolizes the Vision of the “Son of man”/the “Vision of Knowledge”/the “Night Journey” of Mohammed; and by the First Seal in Revelations 6:1-2. II. 3-Dimensional Consciousness & 3-Dimensional Geometry Depending upon the way in which the physicist designs the experiment, an electron sometimes has the properties of a particle and sometimes has the properties of a wave; and, for that reason, is sometimes referred to as a „wavicle‟. But, in fact, there is no such thing as a „wavicle‟. There is merely a „something‟ which has the properties of both a particle and a wave. And to say that there is a „wavicle‟ is to say that there is a shape in plane geometry called a „squircle‟, and which sometimes has the properties of a square and sometimes has the properties of a circle. Now, with regards to the paradigm of the “three dimensions of consciousness” as outlined at: http://science-of-consciousness.blogspot.com/2011/01/jungian-psychology-animaltelepathy.html; some enterprising „scientist‟ of consciousness may very well acknowledge that there are, in fact, three dimensions of consciousness; but then insist, nevertheless, that there must be a necessarily consciousness of the „thinker‟-based „theory‟ or „science‟ of consciousness which can accomplish an explanatory and all-inclusive „grand unification‟—in violation of „Einstein‟s Razor‟, I would argue—of even these three dimensions of consciousness. But that would be to say that there is a shape in solid geometry called a „cupheramid‟, and which has the properties of a cube (representing the consciousness of the „thinker‟), a sphere (representing the consciousness of the “self”), and a pyramid (representing the “observing consciousness”). Furthermore, if an attempt is made to visualize a mathematical point, it is generally visualized as the tiniest sphere possible—rather than, for example, the tiniest pyramid, or tetrahedron, or octahedron possible. And, if that „spherical‟ mathematical point represents the „movement‟ of self-reflection, the consciousness of the “self” would be represented by the sphere itself, the consciousness of the „thinker‟ would be represented by the „cubing of that sphere‟—that is, the „squaring of that circle‟ in 3 dimensions (the 3-dimensional Cartesian co-ordinate system; 2 dimensions of which are represented by the background of the following dance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZCjgPIvBU8 the black color of the dancers costumes representing the color of the Third Seal of the Revelation of John and representing the consciousness of the „thinker‟) by adding a fourth dimension of time (notice the increasing temp of the dance)—whereas the “observing consciousness” would be represented by a pyramid, the mathematical („spherical‟) point at the top of the pyramid representing the „movement‟ of self-reflection that gives rise to the “self”. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 184 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness Thus, the symbols of the Eastern esoteric traditions by which the genital chakra is represented by a square (the consciousness of the „thinker‟), the heart chakra is represented by a circle (the consciousness of the “self”), and the forehead chakra is represented by an upward pointing triangle (the “observing consciousness”). And, thus, the consciousness of the „thinker‟ and the scientific method can be represented by a square; the consciousness of the “self” and Jungian psychology can be represented by a circle; and the “observing consciousness” and the paradigm of the “three dimensions of consciousness” can be represented by a triangle. And, if you watch the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR_51ygQb8U&feature=related carefully, you will observe that, near the beginning of the dance, the base of the triangle (which, in three dimensions, is a pyramid) which represents a square and the consciousness of the „thinker‟—and, within that triangle, the dancers turn in counter-clockwise circles (which, in three dimensions, would be spheres), representing the consciousness of the “self”—is closest to the audience; whereas, with the arrival of Michael Flatley, the triangle is inverted, with the point of the triangle (or pyramid) being closest to the audience (and only Michael Flatley turns counter-clockwise, and only once, representing the „movement‟ of selfreflection, or the „pirouette‟ of consciousness, as is alluded to in the following song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMwn_hnoS5Y And, furthermore, the intersection of the upward pointing and downward pointing triangles is also represented in the Star of David. III. Static Vs. Dynamic Consciousness Einstein‟s Special Theory of Relativity is said to have originated in a thought experiment—or, more accurately, a visualization experiment (the term “thought” experiment itself is evidence of the insistence of the consciousness of the „thinker‟ that it is the only source of information about the physical-conscious reality)—of what a beam of light would look like to an observer who is moving at the speed of light. Similarly, after studying the nature of the carbon-carbon bonds for several years, Kekulé is said to have received a dream (the accounts vary) of six snakes in the form of a circle, each with the tail of the next snake in its mouth; from which he intuited the structure of the benzene ring. And, in each of these instances, a scientific discovery was made on the basis of information which originated from outside the frame of reference of the consciousness of the „thinker‟ itself. The origin of the three dimensions of consciousness paradigm, however—which, however, does not claim to be a scientific theory in the first place; but, rather, a direct observation of the reality of consciousness (and, thus, non-Popper-falsifiable)—was neither a “visualization experiment” nor a dream; but, instead, consisted of a vision I received; which, only later, was understood as signifying the opening of the sixth (or crown) chakra (which occurred precisely 2 ½ days prior to the opening of the Sixth Seal, as described in Chapter 6:12-17 of the Revelation of John); the relevance to the understanding of consciousness which is as follows: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 185 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness Among those who are attempting to formulate an all-inclusive, „unified‟ “science of consciousness” or over-all „theory‟ of consciousness, there now appear to be two principal perspectives; each of which, I would argue, consists of a description of consciousness as a static rather than a dynamic entity: 1) the perspective of the “scientists of consciousness”, which occurs from within the framework of the scientific method, and in accordance with the conceptual structures and requirements of the consciousness of the „thinker‟; and, 2) the Reichian-Jungian perspective on consciousness, which stresses the importance of including, also, the not-precisely-scientific data with regards to the „unconscious‟, the „archetypes of the unconscious‟, and the consciousness of the “self” in any balanced and complete understanding of consciousness. I would argue, however, that consciousness is, instead, a dynamic process rather than a static entity; a process which cannot be adequately explained by either or both of these static descriptions of consciousness, but which involves the rapid oscillation between three dimensions of consciousness: a 3-dimensional „curved-spatiality‟ of consciousness referred to as a consciousness of the “self”; an extension of that „curved-spatiality‟ of consciousness through time, constituting a consciousness of the „thinker‟; and a 2-dimensional, „flat‟-space “observing consciousness” which exists both „outside of‟ and „prior to‟ the „curved-spatiality‟ consciousness of the “self”, and that consciousness extended in time by the consciousness of the „thinker‟. This dynamic view of consciousness can, perhaps, be best visualized by the rapid oscillation in a 3-dimensional space of a geometric figure consisting of a cube, a sphere and a pyramid; each of which is, simultaneously, rotating in all directions: the cube representing the consciousness of the „thinker‟, the sphere representing the consciousness of the “self”, and the pyramid representing the “observing consciousness”—all of which is a partial description of the vision I received on November 28, 1974. IV. Self-Reflection As the Origin of Consciousness The implications and significance of the „movement‟ of self-reflection can be understood only if there is a very careful observation of the origin and over-all movement of consciousness, however that is defined, itself: Assume that you are at a concert listening to Beethoven‟s Fifth Symphony. You are completely immersed into and absorbed by the beauty of the music, to the point that you have completely lost all awareness of any “self”; and there is, in fact, no experiencer which can be at all separated from that experience. In other words, the „experience‟ and the „experiencer‟ still consist of a unified entity of „not yet experiencer‟ and „not yet experience‟. In the very next instant, the time of which cannot be either predicted or explained—nor is this an „action‟ which can be performed intentionally, since it is merely a reflex—you instantly become aware of yourself as being at the concert and listening to the music; something which you experience as being quite pleasurable. There is, somehow, a „pirouette‟ of consciousness itself, or a „movement‟ of self-reflection by which you become aware of yourself as an experiencer experiencing an experience; a realization which, however, is then immediately consumed by the pleasure of the experience itself, causing the “self” to be, once again, consumed in that pleasure. In other words, although the „movement‟ of self-reflection has made it possible for you to acknowledge and experience the pleasure of the music; that very ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 186 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness pleasure causes you to forget that, immediately prior to the experience of the pleasure of that music, there had to have occurred a differentiation of that „not yet experiencer‟ and „not yet experience‟ into an experiencer and an experience. And this is the very first instance of pleasure taking precedence over knowledge; specifically, the knowledge of what precisely occurs with the „movement‟ of self-reflection itself. In other words, the experience of pleasure always leads to a forgetfulness of the fact that there is a „spatiality‟ of consciousness —that is, the “self”—which exists immediately prior to the experience of pleasure. Now, there are a number of things that need to be understood with regards to the observation of the „movement‟ of self-reflection. First of all, that „movement‟ cannot be observed by the consciousness of the „thinker‟ because, in fact, the consciousness of the „thinker‟ does not yet exist; there having been no (even „unconscious‟) postulation of the thought of either a „thinker‟, or a “self”, or an “I”; the experiencer not yet having been differentiated from the experience. Secondly, however, this „movement‟ of self-reflection also cannot be observed by the consciousness of the “self” either; and for precisely the same reason. That is, not even the consciousness of the “self” yet exists to observe the „movement‟ of self-reflection; because, as already stated, there has not yet been any differentiation into an experiencer and an experience. Translation: the “self” cannot observe its own creation for the same reason that you cannot observe your own birth. In other words, that the „movement‟ of self-reflection can be observed at all necessarily means that there is an “observing consciousness” „prior to‟ and „outside of‟ the consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟ to observe that „movement‟. But, at the same time, it must also be acknowledged that this „movement‟ of self-reflection cannot be observed as it is occurring, but only after the fact. In other words, the first piece of knowledge that is acquired by the observation of the „movement‟ of self-reflection is that it has already occurred—and that, in each and every instance in which it occurs, it is recognized as occurring only after it has occurred—leaving, as its only vestige, the knowledge that it has occurred rather than the actual observing of that „movement‟ as it occurs. That is, the “observing consciousness” itself is consumed by the knowledge that the „movement‟ of self-reflection has already occurred. But this knowledge (by the “observing consciousness”) that the „movement‟ of self-reflection has already occurred is merely one element of the knowledge of what that „movement‟ signifies. What must be understood here is that this „movement‟ of self-reflection, in fact, creates the consciousness of the “self” itself; a consciousness of a “self” which „performs‟ the „movement‟ of self-reflection itself. In other words, uni-directional time has not yet been created. Thus, in fact, the „movement‟ of self-reflection must occur in bi-directional time, creating (reflexively) the “self” which „performs‟ the „movement‟ of self-reflection… which creates the “self” which performs the „movement‟ of self-reflection creating the “self” which „performs‟ that „movement‟ etc. And, once that “self” has been created by the „movement‟ of self-reflection, there is additional knowledge about the implications and significance of the origin of that consciousness of the “self”. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 187 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness Observing the “self” very carefully, it can then be seen that the „movement‟ of self-reflection creates both a separation from the space-time reality itself as well as a localized „spatiality‟ of consciousness consisting of a “self”/“not self” (more easily visualized as a sphere; with the “self” inside of that sphere and the “not self” outside of that sphere). In other words, there is a „spatiality‟ of consciousness which can be differentiated from the physical reality (hence, the origin of the metaphysical duality—that is, the separation of matter from consciousness) which is then considered the “not self” (and not conscious) as well as other “selves”, which are also considered by the “self” as being part of the “not self”. In other words, the „spatiality‟ of my consciousness of a “self”—which to you, however, is part of your “not self”—exists over here; while the „spatiality‟ of the consciousness of your “self” exists over there and is part of my “not self”. But, at the same time, it must also be acknowledged that this „movement‟ of self-reflection is a reflex rather than an intentional behavior, there being, as yet, no “self” to have any intention. And, since all behaviors consisting of a reflex originate in neurology, the function of which is to preserve the existence and pleasure of the organism while avoiding annihilation, pain, and threats of annihilation and pain, the neurological origin of the „movement‟ of self-reflection is in the desire for biological self-preservation and pleasure, and the fear of annihilation and pain. In other words, similar to the way in which the “self”/“not self” emerges instantaneously out of the 2-dimensional „flat‟ space and into the 3-dimensional „curved‟ space by means of the „movement‟ of self-reflection; so, too, desire and fear also emerge instantaneously into that 3-dimensional „curved‟ space; a desire and fear which is then associated with not merely biological preservation and pleasure; but, also, with the preservation and pleasure of the “self”/“not self” which has been created by the „movement‟ of self-reflection in the first place. Thus, the „movement‟ of self-reflection is the source of all dualities: “self”/“not self”, pleasure/pain, etc. etc….as well as “good” and “evil”; “good” being associated with the preservation and pleasure of the “self”; “evil” being associated with the annihilation of the “self” as well as anything which is painful to the “self”. The next step in the progression of consciousness, then, is in the postulation of the thought of the “self”, or the „thinker‟, or the “I” for the purpose of maintaining the existence of the „spatiality‟ of the consciousness of the “self” over time (and which, thus, is the origin of unidirectional time); in which case all of the thoughts and beliefs of the „thinker‟ perform the function of preserving the consciousness of the “self” from collapsing into psychosis. Thus, anyone who threatens the validity of the thoughts or beliefs of the „thinker‟ is categorized as “evil”; while anyone who validates the thoughts or beliefs of the „thinker‟—and, thus, prevents the “self” from collapsing into psychosis—is categorized as “good”. Thus, without the „movement‟ of self-reflection, it is crucial to understand that there would be no consciousness at all; while, at the same time, that „movement‟ is the source of both all dualities and the “self”/“not self”; while, on the other hand, the observation of the „movement‟ of self-reflection demonstrates the existence of that third dimension of consciousness itself, which I refer to as the “observing consciousness”. Observing the „movement‟ of self-reflection again, then, it becomes clear that the „pirouette‟ of consciousness referred to as the „movement‟ of self-reflection itself can, perhaps, be more accurately understood as an instantaneous jump from the 2-dimensional „flat‟ space consciousness of the “observing consciousness” into the 3-dimensional „curved‟ space consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟; the consciousness of the „thinker‟ being created ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 188 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness by simply the postulation of the thought of the „thinker‟ in the same way that the “self” is created by the „movement‟ of self-reflection. And, finally, anyone who is capable of reading, following, and understanding the above explanation is, during that time, directly experiencing the “observing consciousness”, whereas the inability to follow and understand this explanation signifies that the reader is operating, instead, in either the consciousness of the „thinker‟ or the consciousness of the “self”. V. Memories of Previous Lives & the 3-Dimensional Consciousness The receiving of the memories of previous lives is one of those aspects or experiences of consciousness which is of no interest whatsoever to the „classical‟ scientists of consciousness (yet, for some unknown reason, they still claim to be pursuing an „all-inclusive explanation‟ of consciousness); especially insofar as it poses a direct and lethal threat to the unsupported assumption and (often-unarticulated) dogma of the “science of consciousness” (and the scientific method in general) that the consciousness of the „thinker‟ is, in fact, the sole and ultimate determiner of the absolute and objective truth about the physical-conscious reality; one of those „absolute‟ and „objective‟ „truths‟ being, for example, that people live only one life (after all, the vast majority of people have had no memories of previous lives at all; thus, almost necessitating, from a scientific perspective, that such memories simply be ignored altogether as being nothing more than „anomalous‟ or „anecdotal‟). And, similarly, those with a Reichian or Jungian perspective on consciousness typically acknowledge little relevance or significance of the memories of previous lives to what Jung has referred to as the “individuation process”. With the realization that there are, in fact, 2 additional dimensions of consciousness beyond the consciousness of the „thinker‟, however, the receiving of memories of previous lives is readily understood to be merely additional evidence in support of the existence of that 3rd dimension of consciousness; a non-temporal, time-independent dimension of consciousness which exists „outside‟ of, and both prior and subsequent to the consciousness of the „thinker‟ and the consciousness of “self” in any one life. And, within the paradigm of the 3 dimensions of consciousness, it can be understood that the receiving of memories of previous lives conveys information from previous “selves” as well as „thinkers‟. Efforts to establish the scientific validity of the memories of previous lives are concerned primarily if not exclusively with memories of the consciousness of a „thinker‟ with regards to those previous lives insofar as it is only memories of the consciousness of a „thinker‟ which are capable of being validated independently and scientifically. And in this genre I would place such books as Soul Survivor; Old Souls; Children Who Remember Previous Lives: A Question of Reincarnation; Unlearned Language: New Studies in Xenoglossy and any other book or study which attempts to validate the reality of previous lives. In addition to these scientifically-verifiable instances demonstrating the reality of previous lives, however, there are also other memories—that is, memories not primarily of a „thinker‟, but of a “self”—which are not capable of independent validation insofar as they consist primarily of immediate sensations, perceptions and emotions (in other words, the experiences of a “self”) rather than the thoughts of a „thinker‟. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 189 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness In the monotheistic Revelations, for example, one of the elements of the Revelation of the “resurrection” includes the revelation of the memories of previous lives; memories which, however, focus either exclusively or primarily upon memories not of a „thinker‟ but of a “self”; memories which would include, for example, not fluency in the language that was spoken in that previous life, nor memories of what people looked like in those previous lives; but, rather, for example, memories of other “selves” with whom that person had experienced close personal relationships in those previous lives, thus providing sufficient knowledge to enable him or her to recognize the identities of those people in both their past and their present lives; none of which, of course, however true it is, can be scientifically validated. VI. Non-Dualistic/Dualistic Consciousness in the Gospel of Thomas The fundamental assumption of the „classical‟ “scientists of consciousness”, although it is not always plainly, loudly, or consistently articulated (but merely taken for granted as a „given‟), is that the scientific method is, for all practical purposes, the “only game in town”; that is, the only available, viable and genuinely serious paradigm for the objective, accurate and complete explanation or description of the reality of human consciousness. On the other hand, those adhering to a Reichian or Jungian perspective on consciousness insist that no explanation of human consciousness can be at all complete without, in addition, an understanding of the „unconscious‟ or the consciousness of the “self”. And, with the inclusion of this psycho-analytical perspective on consciousness, it is widely, if not universally considered (by Western civilization, at least) that virtually all conscious reality has been brought well within the framework of the current understandings; in a way similar to the way in which classical physics was once considered to be a complete explanation of the physical reality. But, in addition to the findings of the parapsychologists and Reverse Speech Analysis, there are a number of statements in the Gospel of Thomas which very seriously and specifically challenge this assumption; and which clearly demonstrate not only the existence of another dimension of consciousness altogether unknown to, and absolutely and completely beyond the frame of reference of both the scientific method and the archetypal psychologists (and thus, beyond, respectively, both the consciousness of the „thinker‟ and the consciousness of the “self”); but, also, that such a third dimension of consciousness constituted a quite crucial element of the Teaching of Jesus; something which, however, is also altogether unknown to, and absolutely and completely beyond the frame of reference of Christian theology; which, similar to the “science of consciousness”, relies primarily, if not exclusively upon the consciousness of the „thinker‟; the function of which is to preserve the consciousness of the “self” over time. The following statements of Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas, then: From Saying #11: “On the day that you were one you became two.” From Saying #19: “Blessed is he who came into being before he came into being.” From Saying #22: “When you make the two one, and when you make the inside like the outside, and the above like the below, and when you make the male and the female one and the same…then will you enter [the kingdom].” ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 190 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness From Saying #61: “I am he who exists from the undivided.” From Saying #85: “Adam came into being from a great power and a great wealth, but he did not become worthy of you. For, had he been worthy [he would] not [have experienced] death…” From Saying #106: “ When you make the two one you will become the „Son of man‟.” can be summarized as follows: 1) Man was Created „by and in the image of God‟ (Genesis 1:27) with a non-dualistic consciousness which „came into being‟ before the dualistic consciousness (of the “self” and the „thinker‟) „came into being‟; 2) It is not merely possible but necessary to regain the experience of that non-dualistic dimension of consciousness (beyond the dualistic consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟) in which all dualities are resolved; 3) The emergence of—that is, „the Fall‟ into--the dualistic consciousness from the nondualistic consciousness is what is referred to in the Gospel of Thomas as „death‟; and, 4) The term “Son of man” itself—and its referent: the Vision of the “Son of man”—is to be understood as a manifestation or expression of the non-dualistic consciousness with which man was Created by God. And, in the context of this affirmation by Jesus in the Gospel of Thomas of the existence of a non-dualistic, third dimension of consciousness prior to the dualistic consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟, it can clearly be observed that both the “scientists of consciousness” as well as the Reichian and Jungian analysts have very sharply restricted their understanding of human consciousness to an examination of, exclusively, the dualistic or „fallen‟ consciousness (of, respectively, the „thinker‟ or the “self”); completely ignoring, however, both the Teaching of Jesus about the non-dualistic consciousness Created „by and in the image of God‟, as well as the teachings of the Eastern esoteric traditions with regards to the (“uncreated”—that is, without any reliance upon God) non-dualistic “observing consciousness”; at least a part of which—specifically, that the dualistic consciousness of the „thinker‟ constitutes (if not the origin, at least) an intensification of duality, conflict and violence—for example, is to be found in the teachings of J. Krishnamurti. Thus, as far as I have been able to determine, all current efforts to develop a new a new understanding of consciousness are and have been focused exclusively on the development of a new “science” of consciousness—or on the achievement of a rigidly “scientific” revolution in the understanding of consciousness—not only to the specific and categorical denial, however, that there is a third, non-dualistic dimension of consciousness; but also, until recently, involving the relentless censorship and exclusion of any non-dualistic perspective on consciousness as even being at all relevant to the conversation. And the major source of this resistance to acknowledging the existence, relevance and importance of the third, non-dualistic dimension of consciousness is the „classical‟ “scientists of consciousness”—that is, the perspective on consciousness of the consciousness of the „thinker‟ (which also, by the way, ignores the relevance and importance of the consciousness ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 191 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 180-191 Cecil, M. Towards A New Paradigm of Consciousness of the “self” to an over-all understanding of human consciousness); symbolized in the fractal Prophecy of Chapter 11 of the Book of Daniel as the “king of the South”, and in the fractal Prophecy of Chapter 13 of the Revelation of John as the “beast of the earth”. VII. Conclusion In this essay, I have postulated the existence of a non-spatial—and, thus, species nonspecific—3rd dimension of consciousness beyond the consciousness of the “self” and the „thinker‟; a dimension of consciousness within the context of which the current paradigm of the („classical‟) “science of consciousness” is to be understood as a „special case‟ (focusing exclusively upon the consciousness of the „thinker‟) of a more all-inclusive description of consciousness based upon the acknowledgement of three rather than only one dimension of consciousness. This description of consciousness extends the range of applicability of the „classical‟ “science of consciousness” to Jungian psychology and, for example, animal presentiment and telepathy. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 381-382 Rosen, S. M. Comment on Gregory Nixon’s “From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness” 381 Commentary Comment on Gregory Nixon’s “From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness” Steven M. Rosen* ABSTRACT Semantic and substantive issues raised by Nixon’s essay are explored. Despite questions regarding the semantics, it is concluded that Nixon effectively challenges the Cartesian paradigm of consciousness by demonstrating that experience is not limited to the reflective self-consciousness of human beings but pervades nature at every level. Key Words: consciousness, panexperientialism, self-consciousness, Cartesian. Nixon (2010) offers a thought-provoking essay written in an engaging style that held my interest from beginning to end. Broadly speaking, the paper’s central theme is that we no longer need to limit our understanding of experience to the reflective self-consciousness of human beings, with the rest of nature comprising naught but insensate “dead matter.” Following Whitehead, Nixon holds that nature is experiential from top to bottom. This panexperientialist approach is agreeable to me and I applaud Nixon’s imaginative advocacy of it. In the abstract to the paper, Nixon asserts his aim of demonstrating that “the terms experience and consciousness are not interchangeable.” He then proceeds to offer various perspectives on consciousness and experience evidently intended to bring out the nuances, subtleties, and ambiguities of these terms. The author acknowledges the challenge posed by the wide variability of definitions from one source to another, and, as I read the material, I was struck by the seeming arbitrariness of some of the distinctions, particularly those more concerned with semantics than with substance. Summarizing the two main schools of thought on his subject, Nixon suggests that the current controversy essentially boils down to those thinkers who contend that all experience is conscious but distinguish reflective or self-consciousness from other forms of consciousness, and those who identify conscious experience with reflectiveness, all other experience being taken as non-conscious. The author appears to favor the latter view, as is consistent with his goal of demonstrating that the terms “consciousness” and “experience” are not interchangeable. In my own view however, the controversy is something of a tempest in a teapot. To me it seems the underlying issue is indeed largely a semantic one revolving around the question of how broadly one defines the term “consciousness.” I believe the matter can be readily resolved by consistently implementing an idea that Nixon himself prominently emphasizes elsewhere in the same paper. The subtitle of Nixon’s essay is “The Continuum of Experience.” Although, in a number of passages, he implicitly draws a categorical distinction between conscious and non-conscious experience, at a certain point in his presentation he adds a caveat: It should be noted that no one is implying the line between the light of conscious apprehension and experiencing ‘in the dark’ is sharp or apparent or that there are not Correspondence: Steven M. Rosen, Ph.D., Emeritus Professor of Psychology, City University of New York E-mail: StevenRosen@shaw.ca ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 381-382 Rosen, S. M. Comment on Gregory Nixon’s “From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness” 382 important degrees of difference within what I am calling non-conscious experience and conscious experience. Experience is a continuum, as Alfred North Whitehead explained. And yet, even after acknowledging this, Nixon continues to draw stark contrasts between conscious and non-conscious experience, never actually articulating explicitly the possibility of degrees of consciousness. It seems to me the problem may lie in the author’s persistent tendency to read the word “consciousness” narrowly, tacitly interpreting it as reflective consciousness. Near the end of the essay, Nixon speaks of “sensations derived from relational encounters between two fundamental entities, which later became internalized within each entity as its own via physiological memory traces…as Deiss (2009) has suggested (though he still equates experience with consciousness).” Nixon’s parenthetic disclaimer notwithstanding, I see no reason why the internalized sensations he refers to could not be considered rudimentary forms of consciousness, rather than as purely nonconscious experience. In fact, it stands to reason that – if development moves along a continuum from non-conscious to conscious awareness as Nixon states elsewhere – the internalized sensations in question should constitute a step away from what is completely unconscious toward consciousness. My working hypothesis then is that Nixon’s inclination to sharply distinguish consciousness from experience and prove that the two terms are not interchangeable is rooted in a semantic predilection to equate all consciousness with fully reflective human consciousness, thereby disallowing the possibility of degrees of consciousness. In his penultimate paragraph, Nixon himself seems to relax his denial of non-reflective consciousness by speaking of the “void consciousness” of the mystics. And he closes by acknowledging the somewhat arbitrary semantic nature of the issue he has dealt with, stating that while “the distinction between conscious experience (aka consciousness) and experience as such is well worth making…if the terminology offends, call it unconscious experience, consciousness without mind, [or] core consciousness….The idea remains the same.” Having expressed my misgivings on the matter of semantics, I want to reaffirm my support for the substance of Nixon’s presentation. His characterization of “void consciousness” struck a particularly responsive chord in me. He describes it poetically as “a sort of background radiation of the psyche that is without objects of awareness, intentionality, or self-direction (indeed without self).” Void consciousness is a pure potentiality for experience, “an invisible pan-present non-presence … that would have zero dimensions (0-D) and remain at time-zero in the eternal present.” In my work on topological phenomenology (2006), I too set forth a zero-dimensional realm of timeless potentiality, a paradoxical domain that defies description in positive terms, as Nixon says of void consciousness. In fact, the essentially panexperientialist account offered in my Topologies of the Flesh details several basic dimensions of consciousness or experience, each a lifeworld in its own right with its own topological structure and distinctive degree of reflectiveness. Another point of contact between Nixon’s work and my own concerns his references to modern physics as a field of study with significant relevance for panexperientialism. In The Self-Evolving Cosmos (2008), I propose what is, in effect, a panexperientialist account of physics and cosmology wherein the basic fields and forces of nature are not merely seen in physical terms but understood as dynamically co-evolving psychophysical action spheres. By way of closing, let me underscore my appreciation of Nixon’s efforts. It is indeed worthwhile to challenge the still-influential Cartesian paradigm that limits consciousness and lived experience to the reflective abstractions of human beings and regards the rest of nature as but a lifeless automaton. In Nixon’s panexperientialism, nature returns to life and its soul is reanimated. References Nixon,G. M. (2010) From panexperientialism to individual self consciousness: The continuum of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 216-233 Rosen, Steven M. (2006) Topologies of the Flesh. Athens, OH: Ohio University Press. ————. (2008) The Self-Evolving Cosmos. Hackensack, NJ: World Scientific Publishing. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 476-477 Smith, S. P. Review of Steve McIntosh's Book: Integral Consciousness and the Future of Evolution 476 Book Review Review of Steve McIntosh's Book: Integral Consciousness and the Future of Evolution Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT Steve McIntosh's "Integral Consciousness and the Future of Evolution" brings a new perspective to integral philosophy. McIntosh breaks new ground beyond Ken Wilber. McIntosh takes the primary values and translates them into feeling, thought and will, thereby providing an overall structure upon which Wilber's plurality of lines (the psychorgraph model) may find their expression. McIntosh adheres to his view of development and evolution as a dialectical spiral, driven by a cosmogenetic organizing principle. The interpenetrating forces of differentiation and integration can be seen functioning in the whole and its parts. McIntosh moves away from Darwin's evolution that is seen empty of purpose. You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/IntegralConsciousness-Future-Evolution-McIntosh/dp/1557788677/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: integral consciousness, future, evolution, Darwain. In describing the passage from traditional consciousness to modern, McIntosh (page 53) writes: "Science eventually came to `colonize' and dominate other spheres of knowing, often going so far as to deny their validity. In many significant areas science developed into scientism, the pathological form of modernist consciousness we noted earlier which maintains that the only `real' reality is objective, material reality." In describing the plurality of consciousness, and their internal interactions, McIntosh (page 57) writes: "Warrior consciousness defeats tribal consciousness because of its ruthless ferocity and energetic determination. Tribal consciousness is usually able to defeat warrior consciousness because of its superior organization and group discipline. Modernist consciousness overcomes traditional consciousness as a result of its technological and industrial superiority. And postmodern consciousness finds its advantage over modernism in its unique ability to bring about change through nonviolent political action and moral strength." McIntosh (page 60) writes on truth: "At the warrior stage of consciousness, the value of truth relates to the real distribution of power - what's true is what is powerful. Truth for traditional consciousness is usually defined by a particular tradition's holy scripture, such as the Bible. Truth for modernist consciousness is generally defined as objective scientific fact, and that which can be materially proved, whereas truth for postmodern consciousness is far more contextually dependent." McIntosh tells us that integral consciousness is the next transcendent stage beyond postmodern consciousness. Integral consciousness recognizes evolution as a dialectical spiral, extending beyond Hegel's philosophy and beyond Teilhard de Chardin's evolution. McIntosh (page 117) writes: "While the rise of integral consciousness will definitely result in the evolution of spiritual culture, it is more likely that most of this evolution will involve the refinement, integration, and improvement of existing spiritual forms rather than the creation of entirely new kinds of spirituality." Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 476-477 Smith, S. P. Review of Steve McIntosh's Book: Integral Consciousness and the Future of Evolution 477 McIntosh (page 132) writes: "My own understanding of the idea of values has been most illuminated through the use of the concept of three `primary values' - the beautiful, the true and the good." McIntosh (page 133) tells us that these three inclinations are reflected in Kant's three critiques: "The Critique of Pure Reason (which is about truth), The Critique of Practical Reason (which is about morality and goodness), and The Critique of Judgment (Which is about aesthetics or beauty)." McIntosh (page 146) writes: "Understood from an evolutionary perspective, the beautiful, the true, and the good show themselves to be the directions of perfection. It's by creating and increasing beauty, truth, and goodness whenever and wherever we can that we make the world relatively more perfect. Thus the revelation of evolution, when viewed from the perspective of integral consciousness, is seen as a progressive teaching about perfection that unfolds by stages, one after the another." McIntosh (page 215) writes: "If the universe has a purpose, then evolution, the all-encompassing activity of the universe, also has a purpose, and this leads to inescapable recognition of some kind of transcendental causation or morphogenetic pull that exerts a subtle influence on all forms of evolution. This does not necessarily mean that biological evolution is the product of `intelligent design' or supernatural intervention, but it does mean that evolution is a purposeful phenomenon of growth that proceeds in a generally positive direction. Thus by starting with experience, and by recognizing that human experience includes the three essential categories of physical, mental, and spiritual experience - none of which can be reduced to any other - integral philosophy finds that it indeed has a metaphysics that is an inescapable part of its worldview." McIntosh (page 217) writes: "The rise of the integral worldview thus marks the beginning of history's Second Enlightenment." McIntosh takes the primary values and translates them into feeling, thought and will, thereby providing an overall structure upon which Wilber's plurality of lines (the psychorgraph model) may find their expression. McIntosh adheres to his view of development and evolution as a dialectical spiral, driven by a cosmogenetic organizing principle. The interpenetrating forces of differentiation and integration can be seen functioning in the whole and its parts. McIntosh moves away from Darwin's evolution that is seen empty of purpose. McIntosh (page 298) writes: "The only way to transcend the opposing forces of part and whole is to move beyond them in a way that includes them both on their own terms... this two-dimensional opposition is transcended through a third-dimensional movement whose form continues to be shaped by the influences of both opposing forces... the curve of the spiral grows outward, its extension responds to the influences of increasing complexity. Yet as it expands, the spiral also continually curves in on itself, yielding its outward extension to the inward gravity of its center and thereby exhibiting the influence of the abiding unity that gives it form... evolution achieves the transcendental movement that originates in a given domain but which is not actually of that domain. Evolution as a whole thus exhibits the continuous ability to transcend the duality of conflict and the limitations of any given container by moving in the direction of an entirely new domain." References Steve McIntosh, 2007, The Biology Of Belief: Unleashing the Power Of Consciousness, Matter and Miracles, Continuum. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1149 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether Article The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether Huping Hu* & Maoxin Wu (Dated: December 21, 2010) ABSTRACT In the beginning there was Consciousness (prespacetime) by itself e0 =1 materially empty and spiritually restless. And it began to imagine through primordial self-referential spin 1=ei0=ei0ei0=eiL-iLeiM-iM=eiLeiMe-iLe-iM=e-iLe-iM/e-iLe-iM=eiLeiM/eiLeiM…such that it created the self-referential Matrix Law, the external object to be observed and internal object as observed, separated them into external world and internal world, caused them to interact through said Matrix Law and thus gave birth to the Universe which it has since passionately loved, sustained and made to evolve. In short, this work is the continuation of our hypothesis of scientific genesis, sustenance & evolution of the Universe and all creations within (the principle of existence). Key Words: Conciousness, prespacetime, hierarchical, spin, self-reference, ether, mathematics, ontology, Matrix Law, Transcendental Law of One, Dual-world Law of Zero, Immanent Law of Conservation. 1. INTRODUCTION Through all of us Consciousness manifests The beauty and awe of what we continuously discover (or rather what Consciousness is revealing in continuation) is still so ecstatic and the first author is struggling to put them in writing (also see Hu & Wu, 2001-2010). Again, let fellow truth seekers and dear readers be aware that we as humans can only strive for perfection, completeness and correctness in our comprehensions and writings because we ourselves are limited and imperfect. As shown in our previous work and further revealed in this work, the principles and mathematics which Consciousness may have used to create, sustain and makes evolving of elementary particles and thus the Universe are beautiful and simple. *Corresponding author: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D. Address: QuantumDream, Inc., P.O. Box 267, Stony Brook, NY 11790, USA. E-mail: hupinghu@quantumbrain.org Note: the models described herein are the subject of an US patent application (App. No. 12/973,633) filed with USPTO on 12/20/2010. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1150 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether First, as proposed in the principle of existence, Consciousness employs the following ontological principles among others: (1) Principle of oneness/unity of existence through quantum entanglement in the body (ether) of prespacetime. (2) Principle of hierarchical primordial self-referential spin creating: - Energy-Momentum-Mass Relationship as Transcendental Law of One - Energy-Momentum-Mass Relationship as Determinant of Matrix Law - Dual-world Law of Zero of Energy, Momentum & Mass - Immanent Law of Conservation of Energy, Momentum & Mass in External/Internal World which may be violated in certain processes Second, as proposed in the principle of existence, Consciousness employs the following mathematical elements & forms among others in order to empower the above ontological principles among others: (1) e, Euler’s number, for (to empower) ether (aether) as foundation/basis/medium of existence (body of prespacetime); (2) i, imaginary number, for (to empower) thoughts and imagination; (3) 0, zero, for (to empower) emptiness/undifferentiated/primordial state; (4) 1, one, for (to empower) oneness/unity of existence; (5) +, -, *, /, = for (to empower) creation, dynamics, balance & conservation; (6) Pythagorean theorem for (to empower) Energy-Momentum-Mass Relationship; and (7) M, matrix, for (to empower) the external and internal worlds (the Dual World) and the interaction of external and internal worlds. This work is organized as follows. In § 2, we shall illustrate scientific genesis in a nutshell which incorporates the genesis of self-referential Matrix Law. In § 3, we shall detail the genesis of self-referential Matrix Law in the order of: (1) Genesis of Fundamental Energy, Momentum & Mass Relationship; (2) Self-Referential Matrix Law and Its Metamorphoses; (3) Imaginary Momentum; (4) Games for Deriving Matrix Law; and (5) Hierarchical Natural Laws. In § 4, we shall incorporate the genesis of self-referential Matrix Law into scientific genesis of primordial entities (elementary particles) and scientific genesis of composite entities. In § 5, we shall show the mathematics and ontology of ether in the principle of existence. Finally, in § 6, we shall conclude this work. §6 are followed by a dedication and [self-]references. 2. SCIENTIFIC GENESIS IN A NUTSHELL Consciousness Created Everything By Self-referential Spin In the beginning there was Consciousness (prespacetime) by itself e0 =1materially empty and spiritually restless. And it began to imagine through primordial self-referential spin ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1151 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 1=ei0=ei0ei0=eiL-iLeiM-iM=eiLeiMe-iLe-iM=e-iLe-iM/e-iLe-iM=eiLeiM/eiLeiM… such that it created the self-referential Matrix Law, the external object to be observed and internal object as observed, separated them into external world and internal world, caused them to interact through said Matrix Law and thus gave birth to the Universe which it has since passionately loved, sustained and made to evolve. We draw below several diagrams illustrating the above processes: Figure 2.1 Illustration of primordial phase distinction The primordial phase distinction in Figure 2.1 is accompanied by matrixing of Consciousness body e into: (1) external and internal wave functions as external and internal objects, and (2) self-acting and self-referential Matrix Law, which accompany the imaginations of Consciousness head so as to enforce (maintain) the accounting principle of conservation of zero, as illustrated in Figure 2.2. Figure2.2 Consciousness Equation ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1152 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether Figure 2.3 shows from another perspective of the relationship among external object, internal object and the self-acting and self-referential Matrix Law. According to our ontology, self-interactions (self-gravity) are quantum entanglement between the external object and the internal object. Figure2.3 Self-interaction between external and internal objects of a quantum entity Therefore, in the principle of existence Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of primordial entities (elementary particles) in prespacetime, that is, within Consciousness itself, by self-referential spin as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0  e iL iL e iM iM  Le Li 1 e iM e iM   1 LM ,e  Aee iM  A    LM ,i  iM   LM  e e iM  LM  e   LM   0  Ai   i   Ai e  (2.1) In expression (2.1), e is Euler number representing Consciousness body (ether or aether), i is imaginary unit representing Consciousness’ imagination in Consciousness head, ±M is immanent content of imagination i such as space, time, momentum & energy, ±L is immanent law of imagination i, L1  ei 0  e iL iL  Le Li 1  1 is Consciousness’ Transcendental Law of One before matrixization, Le is external law, Li is internal law, LM,e is external matrix law, and LM,i is internal matrix law, LM is Consciousness’ self-referential Matrix Law comprised of external and internal matrix laws which governs elementary entities and conserves zero, e is external wave function (external object), i is internal wave function (internal object)and  is the complete wave function (object/entity in the dual-world as a whole). Consciousness spins as 1=ei0=ei0ei0=eiL-iLeiM-iM=eiLeiMe-iLe-iM=e-iLe-iM/e-iLe-iM=eiLeiM/eiLeiM …before matrixization. Consciousness also spins through self-acting and self-referential Matrix Law LM after matrixization which acts on external object and internal object to cause them to interact with each other as further described below. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1153 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 3. GENESIS OF SELF-REFERENTIAL MATRIX LAW Natural laws are hierarchical 3.1 Genesis of Fundamental Energy, Momentum & Mass Relationship In the principle of existence, fundamental energy, momentum & mass relationship: E 2  m 2  p 2 or E 2  m 2  p 2  0 (3.1) is created from the following primordial self-referential spin: 1  ei 0  e iL iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   p  m p   m  i p  m  i p   m 2  p 2  m    i   i      E  E E   E  E   E 2  E E 2  m2  p 2 (3.2) For simplicity, we have set c=1 in equation (3.4) and will set c=ħ=1 through out this work unless indicated otherwise. Expression (3.4) was discovered by Einstein. In the presence of an interacting field of a second primordial entity such as an electromagnetic potential: A  ( , A) (3.3) equation (3.4) becomes for an elementary entity with electric charge e: 1  ei 0  e  iL  iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   p - eA  m p - eA   m i i    E  e  E  e  E  e  E  e     2 2  m  i p - eA  m  i p - eA   m  p - eA      2  E  e  E  e   E  e   E  e 2  m2  p - eA 2 or E  e   m2   p - eA  0 2 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. 2 JCER.com (3.4) Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1154 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 3.2 Self-Referential Matrix Law and Its Metamorphoses In the principle of existence, one form of Consciousness’ Matrix Law LM is created from the following primordial self-referential spin: 1  ei 0  e  iL  iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   p  m p   m  i p  m  i p   m 2  p 2  m    i   i      E  E E   E  E   E 2  E 1 E 2  m 2  E  m   p        p2   p  E  m   p p E m E m    0 p E m p E m p    LM , e E  m   E m    p  (3.5) LM ,i   L M where matrixization step is carried out in such way that   Det L M  E 2  m 2  p 2  0 (3.6) so as to satisfy the fundamental relationship (3.4) in the determinant view. After fermionic spinization: p  p 2   Det(σp)  σ  p (3.7) where σ = (σ1, σ2, σ3) are Pauli matrices: 0 1  1 0 1   0  i  i 0   2   1 0   0  1   3   (3.8) expression (3.7) becomes:  E  m  σ p     LM ,e  σ p E  m  ISSN: 2153-8212 LM ,i   L M  E - α  p  m  E  H Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.9) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1155 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether where α = (α1, α2, α3) and β are Dirac matrices and H  α p  m is the Dirac Hamiltonian. Expression (3.12) governs fermions in Dirac form such as Dirac electron and positron and we propose that expression (3.7) governs the third state of matter (unspinized or spinless entity/particle) with electric charge e and mass m such as a meson or a meson-like particle. If we define:  E  m  σ p    E  m E  m    σ  p  σ  p    σ p E  m  (3.10) Det  We get:  E  m σ p    E 2  m 2  p 2 I 2  0   σ p E  m   Det   (3.11) Thus, fundamental relationship (3.1) is also satisfied under the determinant view of expression (3.13). Indeed, we can also obtain the following conventional determinant:  E  m σp   2 2 2  2    E  m p   0 Det  σp E  m      (3.12) One kind of metamorphosis of expressions (3.5), (3.9), (310) & (3.11) is respectively as follows: 1  ei 0  e iL iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   p  m p   m  i p  m  i p   m 2  p 2  m     i   i        2 E E E E E E E         E 2 p 2  E  p   m     2   m   m  E  p    (3.13) E p Ep m m    0 m E p m E p  Ep   m  ISSN: 2153-8212 1 m    LM ,e E p    LM ,i   L M Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1156 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether m   E σ p    LM , e  m E  σ  p   LM , i   L M (3.14) m   E  σ p   E  σ  p E  σ  p    m  m  E  σ p   m Det  m   E  σ p   E 2  p 2  m 2 I 2  0 E  σ p   m  Det   (3.15) (3.16) The last expression in (3.13) is the unspinized Matrix Law in Weyl (chiral) form. Expression (3.14) is spinized Matrix Law in Weyl (chiral) form. Another kind of metamorphosis of expressions (3.5), (3.9), (310) & (3.11) is respectively as follows: 1  ei 0  e iL iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   1    m  i p  (3.17) p  m p   m  i p  m  i p   m E     i   i         E  E E   E  E    m  i p   E E    m ip  m ip E E    0  m  ip E  m  ip E E     m  ip mip    Le E  E  m iσ p      LM , e  m  i σ  p E    Li   LM LM , i   L M E  m iσ p    EE   m  iσ  p  m  iσ  p  E   m  iσ p   Det  E  m iσ p    E 2  m 2  p 2 I 2  0 E   m  iσ p    Det   (3.18) (3.19) (3.20) Indeed, Q  m  iσ  p is a quaternion and Q  m  iσ  p is its conjugate. So we can rewrite expression (3.29) as:  E    Q ISSN: 2153-8212 Q    LM , e E   LM , i   L M Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.21) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1157 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether If m=0, we have from expression (3.5): 1  ei 0  e  iL  iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   p  0 p   p  p   p 2  0   i   i     i   i    2  E  E E   E  E   E  E 1 E 2  E   p     2    p   p  E   (3.22) p p E E    0 p E p E p    LM , e E   E   p  LM ,i   L M After fermionic spinization p  σ  p , the last expression in (3.22) becomes: σ p   E    LM , e E   σ p  LM , i   L M (3.23) which governs massless fermion (neutrino) in Dirac form. After bosonic spinization: p  p 2  Det(sp  I 3 )  DetI 3   s  p (3.24) the expression in (3.22) becomes: sp   E    LM , e E   sp LM ,i   L M (3.25) where s = (s1, s2, s3) are spin operators for spin 1 particle: 0 0 0    s1   0 0  i  0 i 0    ISSN: 2153-8212  0 0 i   s2   0 0 0    i 0 0   0  i 0   s3   i 0 0  0 0 0   Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.26) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1158 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether If we define:  E  s p  s p   E E   s p  s p E      D e ts    (3.27) We get:  E  s p Dets   2  p x   s p  2    E  p 2  I   p p  3  y x E     pz px  p p x y p2 y p p z y p p  x z (3.28) p p  y z  p2  z  To obey fundamental relationship (3.1) in determinant view (3.27), we shall require the last term in (3.28) acting on the external and internal wave functions respectively to produce null result (zero) in source-free zone as discussed later. We propose that the last expression in (3.22) governs massless particle with unobservable spin (spinless). After bosonic spinization, the spinless and massless particle gains its spin 1. Further, if |p|=0, we have: 1  ei 0  e iL iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   0  m 0   m  m   m 2  m   i   i        2  E  E E   E  E   E  E 1 E 2  E   m     m 2   m  E  E m E m     0 m E m E m   E   LM , e   LM ,i  L M E   m   (3.29)  We suggest the above spaceless forms of Matrix Law govern the external and internal wave functions (self-fields) which play the roles of spaceless gravitons, that is, they mediate space (distance) independent interactions through proper time (mass) entanglement. 3.3 Imaginary Momentum If Consciousness creates spatial self-confinement of an elementary entity through imaginary momentum pi (downward self-reference such that m2>E2) we have: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1159 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether m 2  E 2  p i2   pi2,1  pi2, 2  pi2,3  ipi    Det(σ  ipi ) (3.30) E 2  m 2  pi2  0 (3.31) 2 that is: which can be created by the following primordial self-referential spin: 1  ei 0  e iL iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   p i  m p i   m  i p i  m  i p i   m 2  p i 2  m    i   i        2  E E E E E E E         E 2  m2  pi 2 or E 2  m 2  p i 2  0 (3.32) Therefore, allowing imaginary momentum (downward self-reference) for an elementary entity, we can derive the following Matrix Law in Dirac-like form:  E m  pi     LM , e   pi E m   m   σp i σp i    LM , e  m   LM , i   L M (3.33) LM ,i   L M (3.34) Also, we can derive the following Matrix Law in Weyl-like (chiral-like) form:  E  pi   m  E σp i   m m    LM , e  p i  LM ,i   L M m    LM ,e E σp i  LM ,i   L M (3.35) (3.36) It is suggested that the above additional forms of self-referential Matrix Law govern proton in Dirac and Weyl form respectively. 3.4 Games for Deriving Matrix Law The games for deriving various forms of the Matrix Law prior to spinization can be summarized as follows: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1160 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 0  E 2  m 2  p 2  Det ME  Det Mm  Det Mp  (3.37)  Det( M E  M m  M p )  Det( LM ) where Det means determinant and ME, Mm and Mp are respectively matrices with ±E (or ±iE), ±m (or ±im) and ±|p| (or ±i|p|) as elements respectively, and E2, -m2 and –p2 as determinant respectively, and LM is the Matrix Law so derived. For example, the Matrix Law in Dirac form prior to spinization:  E m  p   LM    p E  m   (3.38) can be derived as follows:  0 0  m 0    Det    Det  E  0 m p E 0 0  E 2  m 2  p 2  Det   E Det   0 0   m 0   0    E   0 m    p p   0   p   E m  p    Det( L M )    Det 0    p E m  (3.39) For a second example, the Matrix Law in Weyl form prior to spinization:  E p LM    m m   E  p  (3.40) can be derived as follows: E 0 0  E 2  m 2  p 2  Det  E Det   0 p 0  0 m    Det   Det E  m 0   0 0   0 m    p     E    m 0   0 0   E p    Det p   m 0  p  m    DetLM  E  p  (3.41) For a third example, the Matrix Law in Quaternion form prior to spinization:  E LM     m i p can be derived as follows: E 0 0  E 2  m 2  p 2  Det  ISSN: 2153-8212  m i p   E   0 0  0 m    Det    Det  E  m 0  i p Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (3.42) i p   0  JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1161 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether  E Det    0 0   0 m   0     E    m 0   i p i p    E    Det  0    m i p  m i p  (3.43)   Det ( LM ) E  3.5 Hierarchical Natural Laws The Natural laws created in accordance with the principle of existence are hierarchical and comprised of: (1) immanent Law of Conservation manifesting and governing in the external or internal world which may be violated in certain processes; (2) immanent Law of Zero manifesting and governing in the dual world as a whole; and (3) transcendental Law of One manifesting and governing in prespacetime. By ways of examples, conservations of energy, momentum and mass are immanent (and approximate) laws manifesting and governing in the external or internal world. Conservations of energy, momentums or mass to zero in the dual world comprised of the external world and internal world are immanent law manifesting and governing in the dual world as a whole. Conservation of One (Unity) based on Energy-Momentum- Mass Relationship is transcendental law manifesting and governing in prespacetime which is the foundation of external world and internal world. 4. SCIENTIFIC GENESIS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES In the beginning Consciousness Created External & Internal Objects & the governing Matrix Law 4.1 Scientific Genesis of Primordial Entities (Elementary Particles) In the principle of existence, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave fermion such as an electron in Dirac form as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0  e  iL  iL e  iM  iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM   m p  m p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ   i   i e E  E E E  m  i p  m  i p  ip μ xμ ip μ xμ   e E E    2 2  m  p  ip μ xμ ip μ xμ E 2  m 2 ip μ xμ ip μ xμ e    e 2 2 E p   ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1162 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 1  E  m   p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ  1   e    e         p  E  m   (4.1)  p ip μ xμ  p ip μ xμ E  m ip μ xμ E  m ip μ xμ e  e  e  e 0 p Em p Em ip  x    E  m  p  ae ,  e       LM ,e    p E  m  a e ip x   i,  LM ,i  ip  x     E  m  σ p  Ae,  e      LM ,e    σ p E  m  A e ip x   i,  LM ,i   e ,     L M   0  i ,    e ,     L M   0  i ,   that is:  E  m  e,   σ  p i ,   or     E  m   σ  p  i ,  e ,     i t e,   m e,   iσ   i ,     i    m    i σ    t i ,  i ,  e ,    (4.2) where substitutions E  i t and p  i have been made so that components of LM can act on external and internal wave functions. In the principle of existence, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave antifermion such as a positron in Dirac form as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0  e  iL  iL e  iM  iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM  p  m p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ m   i   i e E  E E E  m  i p  m  i p  ip μ x μ ip μ x μ   e  E  E   m 2  p 2  ip μ x μ ip μ x μ E 2 m2 ip  x ip  x e    e 2 p2  E  1  E  m   p    ip  x    ip  x   1   e    e    E  m       p     (4.3)  p  ip  x   p  ip  x  E  m  ip  x  E  m  ip  x  e  e  e  e 0 p Em p Em ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1163 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether ip  x    E  m  p  ae,  e       LM ,e    p E  m  a e ip x   i,  LM ,i  ip  x     E  m  σ p  Ae,  e      LM ,e    σ p E  m  A e ip x   i,  LM ,i   e,     L M   0  i ,     e,     L M   0  i ,   Similarly, in the principle of existence, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free plane-wave fermion in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0  e  iL  iL e  iM  iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e iM  iM   m p  m p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ   i   i e E  E E E  m  i p  m  i p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ   e E E    2 2  m  p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ E 2 p 2  ip  x   ip  x  e    e 2 m2  E  1 1  E  p   m    ip  x    ip  x     e  e       m  E  p   E  p  ip  x  E  p  ip  x   m  ip  x   m  ip  x  e  e  e  e 0 m E p m E p  E p    m ip  x    m  ae ,l e     LM ,e ip  x E  p    ai ,r e   E  σ p    m ip  x    m  Ae ,l e     LM ,e  ip x E  σ p    Ai ,r e  (4.4)  e ,l    L M   0  i , r   LM ,i   e ,l    L M   0  i , r   LM ,i  that is:  E  σ  p  e,l  m i ,r     E  σ  p  i ,r  m e,l  or  i t e,l  iσ   e,l  m i ,r     i t i ,r  iσ   i ,   m e,l  (4.5) In the principle of existence, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a free ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1164 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether plane-wave fermion in another form as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0 ei 0  e  iL  iL e  iM  iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM   m p  m p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ   i   i e E  E E E  m  i p  m  i p  ip μ x μ ip μ x μ   e  E  E  (4.6)    m i p  1  ip  x  ip  x  E     e   e      m  i  p  E    E     mi p   m  i p ip  x E ip  x e  e  m  ip E   m  i p ip  x E ip  x e  e 0  m  ip E  ip  x   m i p  ae e    LM ,e  E  ip x   ai e  ip  x   E  m iσ p  Ae e       x   LM ,e  ip E     m  iσ p  A e  i   E     Q 1  ip  x    Q  Ae e    LM , e   ip x   E    Ai e    e    L M   0  i  LM ,i   e    L M   0   i LM ,i   e    L M   0  i  LM , i  (where Q  m  iσ  p is a quaternion and Q  m  iσ  p is its conjugate) that is:  E e  m  iσ  p  i     E i  m  iσ  p  e  or  i t e  m i  σ   i     i t i  m e  σ   i  (4.7) In the principle of existence, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a linear plane-wave photon as follows: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1165 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 1  ei 0  ei 0 ei 0  e iL iL e iM iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e iM iM  p  0 p  ip μ xμ ip μ xμ 0   i   i e E  E E E  p  p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ    i   i e  E  E  (4.8)  p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ  E   ip  x   ip  x   2 e   2 e  p  E  2 2 1  E   p    ip  x    ip  x      e    p  E   e     1  E ip μ x μ  p ip μ x μ E ip μ x μ  p ip μ x μ e  e  e  e 0 p E p E  E    p ip  x    p  a e ,  e     LM ,e ip  x E   a e  i,     LM ,i  e,   L M   0 ip  x    s p  E 0 e,  e   E      LM ,e  ip x E    s p   iB0i,- e     i,     e ,     L M  photon  0   i ,   LM ,i  This photon wave function can be written as:  i (t  k  x )   E 0   i (t k  x )  e,    E   E 0 e       photo     n   iB  iB e  i (t k  x )    iB 0 e   i,     0    (4.9) After the substitutions E  i t and p  i , we have from the last expression in (4.8):  i t is    E    E  B      0   t   is   i t  iB    t B    E  (4.10) where we have used the relationship s   i    to derive the latter equations which together with   E  0 and   B  0 are the Maxwell equations in the source-free vacuum. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1166 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether In the principle of existence, Consciousness creates a neutrino in Dirac form, if Consciousness does, by replacing the last step of expression (3.87) with the following:  ip  x    σp  ae,  e   E      LM , e   ip x  E   σp   ai ,  e     (4.11) LM , i  e,   L M   0   i,    In the principle of existence, Consciousness creates, sustains and causes evolution of a linear plane-wave antiphoton as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0  e  iL  iL e  iM  iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM  p  0 p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ 0   i   i e E  E E E  p  p  ip μ xμ ip μ xμ    i   i e  E  E   p 2  ip μ xμ ip μ xμ  E 2  ip  x ip  x  2 e   2 e  p E     1  E   p   ip  x  ip  x  1    e     p  E   e      E ip μ xμ  p ip μ xμ E ip μ xμ  p ip μ xμ e  e  e  e 0 p E p E  E   p  p  e ,      LM , e E  i ,    ip  x     s p  iB0 e ,  e   E      LM , e   ip x  E    s p   E 0i ,  e  (4.12)  e ,     L M   0  i ,   LM , i   e ,     L M  antiphoton  0  i ,   LM , i  This antiphoton wave function can also be written as: i (t  k  x )   iB 0  i (t k  x )  e,    iB   iB 0 e   e       antiphoton   i (t  k  x )      E  E e E  i,     0   0  ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (4.13) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1167 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether In the principle of existence, Consciousness creates an antineutrino in Dirac form, if Consciousness does, by replacing the last step of expression (4.12) with the following:  ip  x    σp  ae,  e   E      LM , e   ip x  E   σp   ai ,  e    LM , i  e,   L M   0 (4.14)   i,    Similarly, Consciousness likely creates and sustains spaceless (space/distance independent) external and internal wave functions of a mass m in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0 ei 0  e iL iL e iM iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e iM iM  0  m 0  imt imt m   i   i e E  E E E  m  m     e  imt  imt  E  E   m 2   imt  imt  E 2   imt  imt  2 e   2 e  m  E   E   m       m  E  1 eimt eimt 1  E  imt  m  imt E  imt  m  imt e  e  e  e 0 m E m E  E  m  gW ,e e imt      LM ,e imt    m E  gW ,i e   (4.15) VW ,e    L M VW  0 LM ,i    VW ,i   In the principle of existence, Consciousness likely creates, sustains and causes evolution of a spatially self-confined entity such as a proton through imaginary momentum pi (downward self-reference such that m2>E2) in Dirac form as follows: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1168 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0  e  iL  iL e  iM  iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM   m p i  m p i   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ   i   i e E  E E E  m  i p i  m  i p i   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ   e E E     m 2  p i 2   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ E 2  m 2  ip  x   ip  x  e    e 2 2  E p i   1  E  m   p i    ip  x    ip  x       e  e       p i  E  m   1  E  m ip μ xμ  p i ip μ xμ E  m ip μ xμ  p i ip μ xμ e  e  e  e 0  pi Em  pi Em  E  m  p i  se,  e iEt    LM ,e    iEt     p i E  m  si ,  e    LM ,i  e,    L M   0  i ,   (4.16) After spinization of the last expression in (4.16), we have:  E m     σ p i  σ p i  S e,  e i E t   LM ,e  E  m  Si ,  e i E t     LM ,i  e,    L M   0  i ,   (4.17) As discussed previously, it is likely that the last expression in (4.16) governs the confinement structure of the unspinized proton in Dirac form through imaginary momentum pi and, on the other hand, expression (4.17) governs the confinement structure of spinized proton through pi . Thus, an unspinized and spinized antiproton in Dirac form may be respectively governed as follows:    E  m  p i  se,  e iEt  (4.18)   LM ,e LM ,i  D ,e   L M  D  0    iEt       p i E  m  si ,  e   D ,i   E m   σp i σp i  S e,  e iEt    LM ,e  E  m  S i ,  e iEt    D ,e    LM  D  0 LM ,i    D ,i   (4.19) Similarly, in the principle of existence, Consciousness likely creates, sustains and causes evolution of a spatially self-confined entity such as a proton through imaginary momentum ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1169 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether pi (downward self-reference) in Weyl (chiral) form as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0  e  iL  iL e  iM  iM cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM iM   m p i  m p i  ip μ x μ ip μ x μ   i   i e E  E E E  m  i p i  m  i p i  ip μ x μ ip μ x μ   e E E     m 2  p i 2  ip μ xμ ip μ xμ E 2  p i2 ip  x ip  x e    e  2  E m2   1  E  p i   m   ip  x  ip  x  1   e    e       m  E  p i   E  p i ip  x E  p i ip  x  m ip  x  m ip  x e  e  e  e 0 m E  pi m E  pi  E  pi    m  m  se,r e iEt    LM ,e  E  p i  si ,l e iEt   e,r  (4.20)   LM   0 LM ,i    i ,l  After spinization of expression (3.114), we have:  E σp i    m  m  S e,r e i E t   LM ,e  E σp i  Si ,l e i E t   e,r    LM   0 LM ,i    i ,l  (4.21) It is likely that the last expression in (4.20) governs the structure of the unspinized proton in Weyl form and expression (4.21) governs the structure of spinized proton in Weyl form. Thus, an unspinized and spinized antiproton in Weyl form may be respectively governed as follows:  E  pi   m  m  se,l e iEt    LM ,e  E  p i  si ,r e iEt   E σp i   m  m  S e,l e iEt    LM ,e  E σp i  Si ,r e iEt  ISSN: 2153-8212  e,l    LM   0 LM ,i   i ,r   e,l    LM   0 LM ,i   i ,r  Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (4.22) (4.23) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1170 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 4.2 Scientific Genesis of Composite Entities Then, in the principle of existence, Consciousness may create, sustain and cause evolution of a neutron in Dirac form which is comprised of an unspinized proton:   E e  m  p i eA  se,  e iEt         s e iEt   0   p  e A E  e   m i  i ,    p (4.24) and a spinized electron:   E  e V  m  σ p  eA   S e,  e iEt         S e iEt   0     σ  p  e A E  e   V  m    i,   e (4.25) as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0ei 0ei 0  ei 0ei 0 p ei 0ei 0 e  e  iL  iM e  iM  iM p e  iL  iL e  iM  iM e  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM p cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM e p  m p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ    m p  m p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ   m     i   i e      i i   i i e E  E E E  E E  E  p  E e  m2  pi 2  ip  x  ip  x   m2  p 2 ip  x   ip  x        e e 2 2  E E e  p  E 2  m 2  ip  x ip  x    E 2  m 2 ip  x   ip  x   e e     2 2 e  pi p p   E m   p i  1  ip  x  ip  x  1    E m   p  1  ip  x  ip  x  1       e      e    E  m   e    p i  E  m   e  p        e    p   E  m  p i  se,  e i E t     E  m  p  se,  e i E t   0     0          p i E  m  s e i E t      p E  m  s e i E t    i,  p  i,  e     E  e  m  p i  eA  se,  e iEt      0    iEt        p i  eA E  e  m  si ,  e   p        E  e V  m  σ p  eA   S e iEt      e ,  iEt   0        σ p  eA  E  e V  m  S i ,  e   e  n  ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. (4.26) JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1171 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether In expressions (4.24), (4.25) and (4.26),   ,   and   indicate proton, electron and p e n neutron respectively. Further, unspinized proton has charge e, electron has charge –e,  A  ( , A) and A  ( , A) are the electromagnetic potentials acting on unspinized    p  e proton and tightly bound spinized electron respectively, and V  is a binding potential from e the unspinized proton acting on the spinized electron causing tight binding as discussed later.   If A  ( , A) is negligible due to the fast motion of the tightly bound spinized electron, p we have from the last expression in (4.26):    E  m  p i  se ,  e iEt           0     p i E  m  si ,  e iEt    p        E  e V  m  σ p  eA   S e iEt    0     e ,      σ p  eA  E  e V  m  S i ,  e iEt    e n  (4.27) Experimental data on charge distribution and g-factor of neutron seem to support a neutron comprising of an unspinized proton and a tightly bound spinized electron. The Weyl (chiral) form of the last expression in (4.26) and expression (4.27) are respectively as follows:     e  p i  eA  m  se ,r e iEt     0   iEt        m  e  p i  eA  si ,l e  p     iEt    E  e V  σ p  eA  m  S e ,l e     0    m E  e V  σ p  eA   S i ,r e iEt     e n   E  pi   m  se ,r e iEt      0    iEt       m  E  p i  si ,l e  p   iEt    E  e V  σ p  eA     m  S e ,l e     0   iEt       m E  e   V  σ  p  e A S e  i , r    e  n  (4.28) (4.29) Then, in the principle of existence, Consciousness may create, sustain and cause evolution of a hydrogen atom comprising of a spinized proton: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1172 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether   E e  m σp i eA  S e,  e iEt     0    iEt       σ  p  e A E  e   m S e  i ,  i   p (4.30) and a spinized electron:   E  e  m σ p  eA  S e,  e  iEt     0     iEt       σ  p  e A E  e   m S e  i ,    e (4.31) in Dirac form as follows: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0ei 0ei 0  ei 0ei 0 p ei 0ei 0 e  e  iL  iM e  iM  iM p e  iL  iL e  iM  iM e  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM p cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L e  iM  iM e p  m p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ    m p  m p   ip μ x μ  ip μ x μ   m     i   i e      i i   i i e E  E E E  E E  E  p  E e  m2  pi 2  ip  x  ip  x   m2  p 2 ip  x   ip  x        e e 2 2  E E e  p  E 2  m 2  ip  x ip  x    E 2  m 2 ip  x   ip  x   e e     2 2 e  pi p p   E m   p i  1  ip  x  ip  x  1    E m   p  1  ip  x  ip  x  1       e      e    E  m   e    p i  E  m   e  p        e    p   E  m  p i  se,  e i E t     E  m  p  se,  e i E t   0     0          p i E  m  s e i E t      p E  m  s e i E t   i ,  i ,    p   e     E  e  m  σ p i  eA   S e ,  e iEt     0       σ p i  eA  E  e  m  S i ,  e iEt    p      E  e  m  σ p  eA   S e iEt       e ,  iEt   0       σ p  eA  E  e  m  S i ,  e      h e (4.32) In expressions (4.30), (4.31) and (4.32),   p ,  e and   h indicate proton, electron and hydrogen atom respectively. Again, proton has charge e, electron has charge –e, and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1173 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether A  ( , A) and A  ( , A) are the electromagnetic potentials acting on spinized p e proton and spinized electron respectively.   Again, if A  ( , A) p is negligible due to fast motion of the orbiting spinized electron, we have from the last expression in (3.129):    E  m  σ p i  S e ,  e iEt           0     σ p i E  m  S i ,  e iEt    p      E  e  m  σ p  eA   S e iEt    0     e ,      σ p  eA  E  e  m  S i ,  e iEt    e h  (4.33) The Weyl (chiral) form of the last expression in (3.129) and expression (3.130) are respectively as follows: iEt    E  e  σ p i  eA  m  S e,r e      0    m E  e  σ p i  eA   S i ,l e iEt    p     iEt    E  e  σ p  eA     m  S e,l e      0  iEt        m E  e   σ  p  e A S e   i ,r  e h     E  σ p i   m  S e ,r e iEt          0     m  E  σ p i  S i ,l e iEt   p     iEt    E  e  σ p  eA  m  S e ,l e     0   iEt       m E  e   σ  p  e A S e  i , r    e  h  (4.34) (4.35) 5. MATHEMATICS & ONTOLOGY OF ETHER Ether is Mathematical, Immanent & Transcendental 5.1 Mathematical Aspect of Ether In the principle of existence, it is our comprehension that: (1) The mathematical representation of the primordial ether in prespacetime is the Euler’s number (Euler’s Constant) e which makes the Euler’s identity possible: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1174 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether ei  1  0 (5.1) (2) Euler’s number e is the foundation of primordial distinction in prespacetime: 1=ei0=ei0ei0=eiL-iLeiM-iM=eiLeiMe-iLe-iM=e-iLe-iM/e-iLe-iM=eiLeiM/eiLeiM… (5.2) (3) Euler’s number e is the foundation of the genesis of energy, momentum & mass relationship in prespacetime: 1  ei 0  e  iL  iL  Le Li 1  cos L  i sin L cos L  i sin L   (5.3) p  m p   m  i p  m  i p   m 2  p 2  m   i  i      E  E E   E  E   E 2  E E 2  m2  p 2 (4) Euler’s number e is the foundation of the genesis, sustenance and evolution of an elementary particle in prespacetime: 1  ei 0  ei 0ei 0  e iL iL e iM iM  Le Li 1 e iM e iM   1 LM ,e Ae  A    LM ,i  e iM   LM  e e iM  LM  e   LM   0  Ai   i   Ai e  iM (5.4) (5) Euler’s number e is also the foundation of quantum entanglement or gravity in prespacetime. (6) Euler’s number is immanent in the sense that it is the ingredient of (1) to (5) thus all “knowing” and all “present.” (7) Euler’s number is also transcendental in the sense that is the foundation of existence thus “omnipotent” and beyond creation. 5.2 Immanent Aspect of Ether In the principle of existence, the immanent aspect of ether associated with individual entity (“i-ether”) has following attributes: i-ether is the ingredient of atoms, of molecules, of cells, of a body; i-ether is in space, time, motion, rest; i-ether is governed by the laws of physics, chemistry, biology; i-ether is the ingredient of this world, the Earth, the Solar System. i-ether is the ingredient of awareness, feeling, imagination, free will; ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1175 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether i-ether is in love, passion, hope, despair; i-ether is governed by the laws of psychology, economics, sociology; i-ether is the ingredient of mind, soul, spirit. In the principle of existence, the immanent of ether associated with the universal entity (“I-ETHER”) has following attributes: I-ETHER IS atoms, molecules, cells, body; I-ETHER IS space, time, motion, rest; I-ETHER IS laws of physics, chemistry, biology, physiology; I-ETHER IS this World, the Earth, the Solar System. I-ETHER IS awareness, feeling, imagination, free will; I-ETHER IS love, passion, hope, despair; I-ETHER IS the laws of psychology, economics, sociology; I-ETHER IS mind, soul, spirit. 5.3 Transcendental Aspect of Ether In the principle of existence, the transcendental aspect of ether associated with individual/entity (“t-ether”) has following attributes: t-ether is not the ingredient of atoms, of molecules, of cells, of a body; t-ether is not in space, time, motion, rest; t-ether is not governed by the laws of physics, chemistry, biology; t-ether is not the ingredient of this world, the Earth, the Solar System. t-ether is beyond awareness, feeling, imagination, free will; t-ether is beyond love, passion, hope, despair; t-ether is beyond the laws of psychology, economics, sociology; t-ether is beyond mind, soul, spirit. In the principle of existence, the transcendental aspect of ether associated with the universal entity (“T-ETHER”) has following attributes: T-ETHER IS NOT the atoms, molecules, cells, body; T-ETHER IS NOT the space, time, motion, rest; T-ETHER IS NOT the laws of physics, chemistry, biology; T-ETHER IS NOT this world, the Earth, the Solar System. T-ETHER IS NOT awareness, feeling, imagination, free will; T-ETHER IS NOT love, passion, hope, despair; T-ETHER IS NOT the laws of psychology, economics, sociology; T-ETHER IS NOT mind, soul, spirit. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1176 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether 6. CONCLUSION This work is the continuation of the principle of existence. It has mainly dealt with the genesis of self-referential Matrix Law and the ontology & mathematics of ether which have been discovered by us in continuation or rather revealed to us, the submitters to truth, by Consciousness. Yet again, we caution fellow truth seekers and dear readers that we as humans can only strive for perfection, completeness and correctness in our comprehensions and writings because we ourselves are limited and imperfect. According to the principle of existence, in the beginning there was Consciousness (prespacetime) by itself e0 =1 materially empty and spiritually restless. And it began to imagine through primordial self-referential spin 1=ei0=ei0ei0=eiL-iLeiM-iM=eiLeiMe-iLe-iM= e-iLe-iM/e-iLe-iM=eiLeiM/eiLeiM…such that it created the self-referential Matrix Law, the external object to be observed and internal object as observed, separated them into external world and internal world, caused them to interact through said Matrix Law and thus gave birth to the Universe which it has since passionately loved, sustained and made to evolve. The Natural laws created in accordance with the principle of existence are hierarchical and comprised of: (1) immanent Law of Conservation manifesting and governing in the external or internal world which may be violated in certain processes; (2) immanent Law of Zero manifesting and governing in the dual world as a whole; and (3) transcendental Law of One manifesting and governing in prespacetime. Let it also be known that the principle of existence is supported by experiments (or has sound basis in empirical evidence), since experimentally, we demonstrated that: (1) Consciousness is associated with (or simply is) prespacetime and our brain is the vehicle for conscious experiences and interactions; and (2) there exists an instantaneous transcendental force (quantum entanglement or gravity) beyond spacetime which makes omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience of Consciousness (prespacetime) possible and feasible (see Hu & Wu, 2001-2010). In the principle of existence, the principles and mathematics which Consciousness have used to create, sustain and makes evolving of elementary particles are beautiful and simple. First, Consciousness employs the following ontological principles among others: (1) Principle of oneness/unity of existence through quantum entanglement in the body (ether) of prespacetime; and (2) Principle of hierarchical primordial self-referential spin creating: - Energy-Momentum-Mass Relationship as Transcendental Law of One - Energy-Momentum-Mass Relationship as Determinant of Matrix Law - Dual-world Law of Zero of Energy, Momentum & Mass. - Immanent Law of Conservation of Energy, Momentum & Mass in External/Internal World which may be violated in certain processes. Second, Consciousness employs the following mathematical elements & forms among others in order to empower the above ontological principles among others: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1177 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether (1) e, Euler’s number, for (to empower) ether (aether) as foundation/basis/medium of existence (body of prespacetime); (2) i, imaginary number, for (to empower) thoughts and imagination; (3) 0, zero, for (to empower) emptiness/undifferentiated/primordial state; (4) 1, one, for (to empower) oneness/unity of existence; (5) +, -, *, /, = for (to empower) creation, dynamics, balance & conservation; (6) Pythagorean theorem for (to empower) Energy-Momentum-Mass Relationship; and (7) M, matrix, for (to empower) the external and internal worlds (the Dual World) and the interaction of external and internal worlds. DEDICATION: We dedicate this work to Consciousness which created the self-referential Matrix Law, the external object to be observed and internal object as observed, separated them into external world and internal world, caused them to interact through said Matrix Law and thus gave birth to the Universe. [SELF-]REFERENCE Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2001a, Mechanism of anesthetic action: oxygen pathway perturbation hypothesis. Med. Hypotheses, 57: 619-627. Also see arXiv 2001b; physics/0101083. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2002, Spin-mediated consciousness theory. arXiv: quant-ph/0208068. Also see Med. Hypotheses 2004a: 63: 633-646. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2004b, Spin as primordial self-referential process driving quantum mechanics, spacetime dynamics and consciousness. NeuroQuantology, 2:41-49. Also see Cogprints: ID2827 2003. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2004c, Action potential modulation of neural spin networks suggests possible role of spin in memory and consciousness. NeuroQuantology, 2:309-316. Also see Cogprints: ID3458 2004d. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2006a, Thinking outside the box: the essence and implications of quantum entanglement. NeuroQuantology, 4: 5-16. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2006b, Photon induced non-local effect of general anesthetics on the brain. NeuroQuantology, 4: 17-31. Also see Progress in Physics 2006c; v3: 20-26. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2006d, Evidence of non-local physical, chemical and biological effects supports quantum brain. NeuroQuantology, 4: 291-306. Also see Progress in Physics 2007a; v2: 17-24. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2007b, Thinking outside the box II: the origin, implications and applications of gravity and its role in consciousness. NeuroQuantology, 5: 190-196. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2007c, On dark chemistry: what’s dark matter and how mind influences brain through proactive spin. NeuroQuantology, 5: 205-213. Hu, H. & Wu, M. 2008a, Concerning spin as mind-pixel: how mind interacts with the brain through electric spin effects. NeuroQuantology, 6: 26-31. Hu, H. 2008b, The state of science, religion and consciousness. NeuroQuantology, 6: 323-332. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1149-1178 1178 Hu, H. &Wu, M. The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether Hu, H. 2009, Quantum enigma - physics encounters consciousness (book review). Psyche, 15: 1-4. Hu, H. & Wu, M. (2010), Let All Truth Seekers Be the Scientific & Spiritual Vessels to Carry Science & Religion to New Heights, Scientific GOD Journal 1:1, pp. 1-7. Hu, H. & Wu, M. (2010), The Principle of Existence: Toward a Scientific Theory of Everything, Scientific GOD Journal 1:1, pp. 8-77. Hu, H. (2010), GOD's Scientific Truth Is Marching on (Poem), Scientific GOD Journal 1:1, pp. 78-79. Hu, H. & Wu, M. (2010), Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Consciousness Research to New Heights, JCER 1:1, pp. 1-4. Hu, H. & Wu, M. (2010),The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness, JCER 1:1, pp. 50-119. Hu, H. (2010), Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Physics Research to New Heights, Prespacetime journal 1:1, pp. 1-3. Hu, H. & Wu, M. (2010), Prespacetime Model of Elementary Particles, Four Forces & Consciousness, Prespacetime journal 1:1, pp. 77-146. Hu, H. (2010), Song to Immanence & Transcendence (Poem), Scientific GOD Journal 1:6, pp. 455-456. Hu, H. (2010), Oh My Atheist Colleagues in Science (Poem), Scientific GOD Journal 1:7, pp. 518-519. Hu, H. & Wu, M. (2010), Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research, JCER 1:8, pp. 888-897. Hu, H. & Wu, M. (2010), Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources, JCER 1:8, pp. 907-936. Hu, H. & Wu, M. (2010), Consciousness-mediated Spin Theory: The Transcendental Ground of Quantum Reality, JCER 1:8, pp. 937-970. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Pages 383-389 Vimal, R. L. P. Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Proto-experiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences 383 Commentary Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Protoexperiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences Ram L. P. Vimal* ABSTRACT A general definition of consciousness that accommodates most views (Vimal, 2010b) is: “ ‘consciousness is a mental aspect of a system or a process, which is a conscious experience, a conscious function, or both depending on the context and particular bias (e.g. metaphysical assumptions)’, where experiences can be conscious experiences and/or non-conscious experiences and functions can be conscious functions and/or non-conscious functions that include qualities of objects. These are a posteriori definitions because they are based on observations and the categorization.” Non-conscious experiences are equivalent to relevant proto-experiences and nonconscious functions are equivalent to related proto-functions at various levels as these terms are precursors of respective conscious subjective experiences and conscious functions aspect of consciousness. The non-conscious experiences and non-conscious functions may be considered as a part of the definition of mind and/or awareness. My congratulations to Gregory Nixon for a very thorough and sophisticated essay, and my apologies for the rather hasty attempt to provide a hopefully relevant comment, for which opportunity I am grateful. Key Words: consciousness, dual-aspect dual-mode framework, experiences, conscious experiences, non-conscious experiences, functions, conscious functions, non-conscious functions, protoexperiences, proto-functions, subjective experiences, self, mind, awareness, panexperientialism. In (Vimal, 2010a), we proposed that there are three entities that need to be appropriately linked and addressed: structure, function, and experience. For example, there is a structure ‘V4/V8/VO’ color neural-network,1 which has a function of detection and discrimination of wavelengths of light. In addition, normal trichromats have color related subjective experience (SE), such as redness, which needs to be appropriately linked to related structure and function. According to (Nixon, 2010), “terms experience and consciousness are not interchangeable. Experience is a notoriously difficult concept to pin down, but I see non-conscious experience as based mainly in momentary sensations, relational between bodies or systems [there are 21 indicators of nonconscious experience] […] non-conscious experience as the precursor and foundation of subjective consciousness. […] Experience is a continuum [from non-conscious, to conscious, to self-transcending awareness], as Alfred North Whitehead explained [(Whitehead, 1978)]. […] Non-attended (nonsubjective) experience [phenomenal SE that cannot be reported; attended experience is access Correspondence: Ram L. P. Vimal, Vision Research Institute, 428 Great Road, Suite 11, Acton, MA 01720 USA E-mail: rlpvimal@yahoo.co.in 1 The color area ‘V8/V4/VO’ refers to visual area V8 of Tootell group (Hadjikhani, Liu, Dale, Cavanagh, & Tootell, 1998; Tootell, Tsao, & Vanduffel, 2003), visual area V4 of Zeki group (Bartels & Zeki, 2000), and VO of Wandell group (Wandell, 1999); they are the same human color area (Tootell et al., 2003). VO stands for ventral-occipital cortex. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Pages 383-389 Vimal, R. L. P. Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Proto-experiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences 384 SE that is reportable] has affect — that is, it disturbs or creates emotions — and it has notable effects, too, on actual behaviour or on thought. […] Consciousness is certainly dependent on the animal capacity for experience. […] Experience is divided into subject and object. […] panexperientialism implies straightforwardly that the entire universe is in some way alive or has the potential of becoming so at any time anywhere. […] I suggest the distinction between conscious experience (aka consciousness) and experience as such is well worth making. If the terminology offends, call it unconscious experience, consciousness without mind, core consciousness, or experience without a subject, as others have.” The above is consistent with (Vimal, 2010b): (Nixon, 2007) and (Pereira Jr. & Ricke, 2009) argued that experience can occur with and without consciousness2. In this context, experiences could be conscious experiences and non-conscious experiences, and functions could be conscious functions and non-conscious functions. Non-conscious experiences are those experiences that are not conscious experiences; for example, experiences related to pre-conscious, subconscious and unconscious domains, slow-wave dreamless deep-sleep, coma, vegetative, and anesthetized state. Non-conscious experiences can include experiences related to awareness without being aware or paradoxical awareness, such as blindsight and subliminal perception. Non-conscious functions are those functions that are not conscious functions; for example, functions related to pre-conscious, subconscious and unconscious domains, slow-wave dreamless deep-sleep, coma, vegetative, and anesthetized state. Non-conscious functions can include functions related to awareness without being aware or paradoxical awareness, such as subliminal perception and related state consciousness (Rosenthal, 2009), blindsight, long-term memory, and implicit memory (listed in Table 1 of (Vimal, 2009a)). One could ask: What is the difference between non-conscious functions and non-conscious experiences? Would both reduce to proto-experiences? The meanings attributed to the term ‘consciousness’ have been categorized in to functions and experiences (Vimal, 2009a). Functions are related to third person objective measurements related to the function of the system, whereas, experiences are first person subjective observations. Since non-conscious experiences are those experiences that are not conscious experiences, they are indeed proto-experiences in the dual-aspect dual-mode PE-SE framework. However, since non-conscious functions are those functions that are not conscious functions, it would be more appropriate to call them proto-functions. For example, in blindsight, subjects do not have conscious experience but they report ‘seeing’ something in cortically blind field; this experience is non-conscious experience or proto-experience. In addition, one could argue that subjects have no conscious function but they ‘guess’ above chance level, which can be interpreted as they can somewhat effectively detect and discriminate certain visual stimuli; this function can be called the related proto-function (Vimal, 2010b). (Nixon, 2010) and (Vimal, 2010b) have elaborated examples of non-conscious experiences; we list some of them in terms of two categories, namely non-conscious experiences and non-conscious functions (Table 1). 2 “In (Vimal, 2009a), over forty meanings (or aspects) attributed to the term consciousness were extracted from the literature and from online discussion groups; some of them overlapped and some were mutually exclusive, but certainly the list was in no way exhaustive. These meanings were categorized into two groups of mental entities: function and experience. It was emphasized that the prospect for reaching any single, agreed framework independent definition of consciousness appears remote” (Vimal, 2010b). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Pages 383-389 Vimal, R. L. P. Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Proto-experiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences 385 Table 1. List of some of non-conscious experiences and non-conscious functions No . 1 Name Non-conscious experiences Subjects do not have conscious experience but they report ‘seeing’ something in cortically blind field Non-conscious functions Subjects have no conscious function but they can respond, detect, and discriminate appropriately to certain visual stimuli 2 Anton’s No conscious syndrome: denial experience of of blindness external visual stimuli, but subjects deny it. No conscious function, but they subjects deny it and bump into things, stumble, fall, and unable to share perception 3 Prosopanosogno sia No conscious function such as no recognition of familiar faces. However, brain activation and skin galvanization suggest some level the face recognition. Blindsight No conscious experience familiar faces but may have strong emotional response References (Carey, Sahraie, Trevethan, & Weiskrantz, 2008; de Gelder, Vroomen, Pourtois, & Weiskrantz, 1999; Heywood, Kentridge, & Cowey, 1998; Kentridge, Heywood, & Weiskrantz, 1999, 2004; Lamme, 2001; Lau & Passingham, 2006; Trevethan, Sahraie, & Weiskrantz, 2007a, 2007b; Weiskrantz, 2004, 2009) (Abdulqawi, Ashawesh, & Ahmad, 2008; Abutalebi et al., 2007; Damasio, 1999; Maddula, Lutton, & Keegan, 2009; McDaniel & McDaniel, 1991; Roos, Tuite, Below, & Pascuzzi, 1990; Suzuki, Endo, Yamadori, & Fujii, 1997; Wessling, Simosono, EscosaBage, & de Las HerasEcheverria, 2006; Yilmazlar, Taskapilioglu, & Aksoy, 2003) (Sacks, 1985) As noted above, (Vimal, 2010b) has elaborated non-conscious experiences and non-conscious functions. (Nixon, 2010) have discussed 21 indicators/examples of non-conscious experiences related to blindsight (no conscious experience but subjects can respond appropriately to certain visual stimuli), Anton’s syndrome (denial of blindness), prosopanosognosia (no conscious experience familiar faces but may have strong emotional response), amnesia (cannot remember people but may have physiological and emotional responses), split brain subjects, sleepwalking, dream effect, alcohol and drug effects, post-hypnotic suggestion, implicit memory/learning/knowledge or priming, subliminal perception, habitual behavior, reflex actions, pre-conscious and feral humans, non-human animals, psychoanalysis, the collective unconscious and mythic memory, panexperientialism, physics and quantum potentia, higher order thought or higher order perception and speech theories, supersensory or extra-sensory perception (psi), and proto-experiences. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Pages 383-389 Vimal, R. L. P. Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Proto-experiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences 386 According to (Pereira Jr. & Ricke, 2009), “when we are sleeping without dreams we nevertheless have experiences without consciousness, e.g. the proprioceptive ones that prevent us falling out of our beds! Another good example of experience without consciousness is blindsight, a phenomenon in which people who are perceptually blind in a certain region of their visual field respond to visual stimuli without any associated qualitative experience ('quale'). […] In conscious experience there is a content experienced by a subject, while in the case of unconscious phenomena there may be among other possible combinations - a subject without content (e.g. animals under general anesthesia), and informational content without a subject (e.g. information patterns in the Hard Disk of a computer). More precisely, according to the referential nucleus above, an experience is conscious when there is a reportable content being experienced by a subject, such that the content is content for the subject. […] If a robot has feedback mechanisms allowing the completion of actionperception cycles, then it can be considered as having experiences, but not conscious subjective experience, because of the lack of content and subjectivity [artificial consciousness].“ This conception of non-conscious experiences is similar to or identical with proto-experiences (PEs) in the dual-aspect dual-mode PE-SE framework (Vimal, 2008a, 2008b, 2009b, 2010a) at various levels; for example, PEs related to sleep, dream, blindsight, general anesthesia, robots, and so on. This is because PEs are those experiences that not SEs; rather, PEs are precursor of SEs (Vimal, 2010b) so are the non-conscious experiences. In addition, or framework is consistent with the hypothesis that experience is a continuum because experiences at various levels range from elemental PEs to atomic PEs to molecular PEs to neural-net PEs to SEs and all PEs in between. Non-attended (nonsubjective) experiences or non-conscious experiences appear equivalent to phenomenal SE that cannot be reported; whereas, attended experiences are access SEs that are reportable. Experience can be divided into subject and object, where SE of subject is self (Bruzzo & Vimal, 2007) and SE of object could be the aspect of phenomenal or access consciousness (Vimal, 2009c). Panexperientialism (entire universe is alive) may be close to Shiva in Trika Kashmir Shaivism (Kaul, 2002; Raina Swami Lakshman Joo, 1985; Wilberg, 2008), where Shiva is the mental aspect of entire universe and Shakti is its material aspect in dual-aspect framework (Vimal, 2009d, 2010c). In my view, non-conscious experience is equivalent to proto-experience (PE) because both appear to have similar or same meaning that they are not conscious subjective experience (SE). According to (Vimal, 2010b), “Based on the dual-aspect-dual-mode proto-experience/subjective experience (PESE) optimal framework, the optimal definition of consciousness is ‘consciousness is a mental aspect of a system or a process, which has two sub-aspects: conscious experience and conscious function.’ A more general definition is: ‘consciousness is a mental aspect of a system or a process, which is a conscious experience, a conscious function, or both depending on the context and particular bias (e.g. metaphysical assumptions)’, where experiences can be conscious experiences and/or non-conscious experiences and functions can be conscious functions and/or non-conscious functions that include qualities of objects. These are a posteriori definitions because they are based on observations and the categorization.” To sum up, (Nixon, 2010)’s elaboration of 21 indicators of non-conscious experience is interesting and non-conscious experiences are equivalent to relevant proto-experiences at various levels as both terms are precursors of conscious subjective experiences aspect of consciousness. There are over 40 different aspect of consciousness that were categorized into functions and experiences (Vimal, 2009a). The non-conscious experiences and related non-conscious functions can be considered as a part of the definition of mind and/or awareness as elaborated in (Vimal, 2010b). Acknowledgments ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Pages 383-389 Vimal, R. L. P. Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Proto-experiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences 387 The work was partly supported by VP-Research Foundation Trust and Vision Research Institute research Fund. Author would like to thank anonymous reviewers, Manju-Uma C. Pandey-Vimal, Vivekanand Pandey Vimal, Shalini Pandey Vimal, and Love (Shyam) Pandey Vimal for their critical comments, suggestions, and grammatical corrections. The author is also affiliated with (1) Dristi Anusandhana Sansthana, A-60 Umed Park, Sola Road, Ahmedabad-61, Gujrat, India; (2) Dristi Anusandhana Sansthana, c/o NiceTech Computer Education Institute, Pendra, Bilaspur, C.G. 495119, India; and (3) Dristi Anusandhana Sansthana, Sai Niwas, East of Hanuman Mandir, Betiahata, Gorakhpur, U.P. 273001 India. His URL is http://www.geocities.com/rlpvimal/ References Abdulqawi, R., Ashawesh, K., & Ahmad, S. (2008). Medical image. Anton's syndrome secondary to cerebral vasculitis. N Z Med J, 121(1281), 89-90. Abutalebi, J., Arcari, C., Rocca, M. A., Rossi, P., Comola, M., Comi, G. C., Rovaris, M., & Filippi, M. (2007). Anton's syndrome following callosal disconnection. Behav Neurol, 18(3), 183-186. Bartels, A., & Zeki, S. (2000). The architecture of the colour centre in the human visual brain: new results and a review. Eur J Neurosci, 12, 172–193. Bruzzo, A. A., & Vimal, R. L. P. (2007). Self: An adaptive pressure arising from self-organization, chaotic dynamics, and neural Darwinism. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 6(4), 541-566. Carey, D. P., Sahraie, A., Trevethan, C. T., & Weiskrantz, L. (2008). Does localisation blindsight extend to two-dimensional targets? Neuropsychologia, 46(13), 3053-3060. Damasio, A. R. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. New York: Harcourt Brace. de Gelder, B., Vroomen, J., Pourtois, G., & Weiskrantz, L. (1999). Non-conscious recognition of affect in the absence of striate cortex. Neuroreport, 10(18), 3759-3763. Hadjikhani, N., Liu, A. K., Dale, A. M., Cavanagh, P., & Tootell, R. B. (1998). Retinotopy and color sensitivity in human visual cortical area V8. Nat Neurosci, 1(3), 235-224; Comment in: Nat Neurosci 1998 Jul;1991(1993):1171-1993. Comment in: Nat Neurosci 1998 Sep;1991(1995):13351996. Heywood, C. A., Kentridge, R. W., & Cowey, A. (1998). Cortical color blindness is not "blindsight for color". Conscious Cogn., 7(3), 410-423. Kaul, J. K. (2002). Fundamental Aspect of Vedanta and Kashmir Shaivis (A comparative view of the two Philosophies). In Swami Lakshman Joo Maharaj Raina (Ed.), Kashmir Saivism (pp. 33-38): KASHMIR NEWS NETWORK (KNN): Available: http://download-book.net/Lakshmanjoo-Maharajpdf.html. Kentridge, R. W., Heywood, C. A., & Weiskrantz, L. (1999). Attention without awareness in blindsight. Proc Biol Sci, 266(1430), 1805-1811. Kentridge, R. W., Heywood, C. A., & Weiskrantz, L. (2004). Spatial attention speeds discrimination without awareness in blindsight. Neuropsychologia, 42(6), 831-835. Lamme, V. A. (2001). Blindsight: the role of feedforward and feedback corticocortical connections. Acta Psychol (Amst), 107(1-3), 209-228. Lau, H. C., & Passingham, R. E. (2006). Relative blindsight in normal observers and the neural correlate of visual consciousness. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 103(49), 18763-18768. Maddula, M., Lutton, S., & Keegan, B. (2009). Anton's syndrome due to cerebrovascular disease: a case report. J Med Case Reports, 3(1), 9028. McDaniel, K. D., & McDaniel, L. D. (1991). Anton's syndrome in a patient with posttraumatic optic neuropathy and bifrontal contusions. Arch Neurol, 48(1), 101-105. Nixon, G. (2007). The Continuum of Experience: Non-Conscious Experience. Karl Jaspers Forum TA95A, available at http://www.kjf.ca/95A-TANIX.htm. Nixon, G. M. (2010). From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness: The Continuum of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 1(3): 216-233 ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Pages 383-389 Vimal, R. L. P. Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Proto-experiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences 388 Pereira Jr., A., & Ricke, H. (2009). What is Consciousness? Towards a Preliminary Definition. Journal of Consciousness Studies: Special Issue on Defining consciousness (Ed. Chris Nunn), 16(5), 28-45. Raina Swami Lakshman Joo. (1985). Kashmir Saivism: The Secret Supreme. Srinagar and New York: Universal Shaiva Trust and State University of New York Press. Roos, K. L., Tuite, P. J., Below, M. E., & Pascuzzi, R. M. (1990). Reversible cortical blindness (Anton's syndrome) associated with bilateral occipital EEG abnormalities. Clin Electroencephalogr, 21(2), 104-109. Rosenthal, D. (2009). Concepts and definitions of consciousness. In P. W. Banks (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Consciousness (pp. Available at davidrosenthal1.googlepages.com/elsevier.pdf). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Sacks, O. (1985). The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat. New York: Harper & Row. Suzuki, K., Endo, M., Yamadori, A., & Fujii, T. (1997). Hemispatial neglect in the visual hallucination of a patient with Anton's syndrome. Eur Neurol, 37(1), 63-64. Tootell, R. B. H., Tsao, D., & Vanduffel, W. (2003). Neuroimaging Weighs In: Humans Meet Macaques in “Primate” Visual Cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 23(10), 3981–3989. Trevethan, C. T., Sahraie, A., & Weiskrantz, L. (2007a). Can blindsight be superior to 'sighted-sight'? Cognition, 103(3), 491-501. Trevethan, C. T., Sahraie, A., & Weiskrantz, L. (2007b). Form discrimination in a case of blindsight. Neuropsychologia, 45(9), 2092-2103. Vimal, R. L. P. (2008a). Attention and Emotion. The Annual Review of Biomedical Sciences (ARBS), 10, 84-104. Vimal, R. L. P. (2008b). Proto-experiences and Subjective Experiences: Classical and Quantum Concepts. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 7(1), 49-73. Vimal, R. L. P. (2009a). Meanings attributed to the term 'consciousness': an overview. Journal of Consciousness Studies: Special Issue on Defining consciousness (Ed. Chris Nunn), 16(5), 9-27. Vimal, R. L. P. (2009b). The Most Optimal Dual-Aspect-Dual-Mode Framework for Consciousness: Recent Development. [Available: http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/2009-Vimal-MostOptimal-Consciousness-Framework-Summary-2-12.pdf]. In M. Weber (Ed.), Chromatikon: Yearbook of Philosophy in Process (pp. 295-307). Vimal, R. L. P. (2009c). Necessary Ingredients of Consciousness: Integration of Psychophysical, Neurophysiological, and Consciousness Research for the Red-Green Channel. Vision Research Institute: Living Vision and Consciousness Research [Available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/2009-Vimal-Necessary-Ingredients-ConciousnessLVCR-2-1.pdf], 2(1), 1-40. Vimal, R. L. P. (2009d). Pre-existence of Subjective Experiences in Type-B Materialism: Bridging Materialism and Anti-materialism via Dual-Aspect Optimal Framework. Vision Research Institute: Living Vision and Consciousness Research [Available: http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/2009-Vimal-Bridging-Materialism-andantiMaterialism-LVCR-2-2.pdf], 2(2), 1-85. Vimal, R. L. P. (2010a). Matching and selection of a specific subjective experience: conjugate matching and subjective experience. Forthcoming in June issue of Journal of Integrative Neuroscience [Longer version is available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/2009Vimal-Matching-Selection-LVCR-3-1.pdf], 8(2). Vimal, R. L. P. (2010b). On the Quest of Defining Consciousness. [Longer version is available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/2010-Vimal-DefineC-LVCR-3-2.pdf]. Forthcoming in Mind and Matter. Vimal, R. L. P. (2010c). Towards a Theory of Everything Part I - Introduction of Consciousness in Electromagnetic Theory, Special and General Theory of Relativity. NeuroQuantology (accepted for publication) [Available: http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/2010-NQ-Vimal-TOE-Part-ILVCR-3-3.doc], 8(2). ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Pages 383-389 Vimal, R. L. P. Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Proto-experiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences 389 Wandell, B. A. (1999). Computational neuroimaging of human visual cortex. Annu. Rev. Neurosci., 22, 145-173. Weiskrantz, L. (2004). Roots of blindsight. Prog Brain Res, 144, 229-241. Weiskrantz, L. (2009). Is blindsight just degraded normal vision? Exp Brain Res, 192(3), 413-416. Wessling, H., Simosono, C. L., Escosa-Bage, M., & de Las Heras-Echeverria, P. (2006). Anton's syndrome due to a giant anterior fossa meningioma. The problem of routine use of advanced diagnostic imaging in psychiatric care. Acta Neurochir (Wien), 148(6), 673-675; discussion 675. Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and Reality. An Essay in Cosmology. New York-London: The Free Press. A division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.-Collier Macmillan Publishers. Orignially published in 1929; this is a corrected edition. Wilberg, P. (2008). Heidegger, Phenomenology and Indian Thought. UK: New Gnosis Publications, www.newgnosis.co.uk. Yilmazlar, S., Taskapilioglu, O., & Aksoy, K. (2003). Transient Anton's syndrome: a presenting feature of acute epidural hematoma at the confluens sinuum. Pediatr Neurosurg, 38(3), 156-159. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

466 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 466-466 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Ram Vimal Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal Gregory M. Nixon* Right off the bat, I’d like to state that I am strongly attracted to Vimal’s definition of consciousness, as elucidated in the abstract. I might quibble and ask for the word psyche instead of mind, which he uses, and I might suggest that for common useage the definition could be even more simplified, but really it stands as is. However, he does not mention conscious transcendence (or, better, transcendent awareness). Aside from this oversight (which is probably implied since Vimal has written elsewhere of higher states of consciousness), it is the most comprehensive definition I have seen stated in the fewest possible words. However, in the series of unspecified quotations he attributes to me, I see, “Experience is divided into subject and object.” Now I don’t believe that experience-in-itself, raw experience, is divided into subject and object, so I can’t conceive of me saying this except to explain how experience becomes conscious experience, which is precisely by sundering object from subject through linguistic syntax. If, for experience-in-itself, subject and object are one, then it follows that non-conscious functions and nonconscious experiences may also be identical. However, I might add that much nonconscious experiencing could in principle become conscious experiencing under the right circumstances with the right sort of symbols and cognitive tools. Non-conscious functions, on the other hand, might be expected to stay non-conscious since are often only the physical substrate for more subtle mental processes. I really appeciate Vimal’s carefully thought-out tables and charts. For many, they will clarify the subject of this discussion. I like to keep things simple, however, if only for the reason that trying to get others to give some consideration to this a new (yet ancient) way of thinking about consciousness means avoiding the complexity that will scare them away. This is certainly not to say Vimal is wrong; on the contrary, it is to praise him for going beyond what I have attempted. By making the picture more complex he is also clarifying it. I can’t agree, however, that non-conscious experience is the same as proto-experience, since, as in my 21 Indicators, real somatic experience (sensations, perceptions, and emotions) clearly happen even when the observing mind is not conscious of it. Reference Vimal, R. P.L. (2010) Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Proto-experiences and Protofunctions, and Subjective Experiences. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 383-389. Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

1235 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1235-1237 Smith, S. P. Review of Edmund Husserl’s Book: Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology Book Review Review of Edmund Husserl’s Book: Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT All objective philosophy and positive science are unreal, that is, they all depend on pregivens that are subjective in nature. To question the pregivens is to enter phenomenology, and it is here that psychology transforms itself into Husserl's transcendental phenomenology. All "objective" science requires its purification by a transcendental psychology. Husserl (page 257) writes: "a pure psychology as positive science, a psychology which would investigate universally the human beings living in the world as real facts in the world, similarly to other positive sciences (both sciences of nature and humanistic disciplines), does not exist. There is only a transcendental psychology, which is identical with transcendental philosophy." You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Crisis-European-SciencesTranscendental-Phenomenology/dp/081010458X/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: Edmund Husserl, crisis, European sciences, transcendental phenomenology. Edmund Husserl's "The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology" resonates well. The following are my impressions and reflections after reading this very interesting book. Every object-subject composite (relation) is a "phenomenon", and Husserl begins his phenomenology from Descartes' doubt that cannot be doubted. Husserl notes that the phenomenon is open to exploration. We explore so we can discover what is pregiven, so we can find our preconditions. Husserl reminds us that Kant was sterred from his slumber by Hume's skepticism. Kant's "appearance" is embedded in a space-time manifold, and as such it represents a phenomenon that hides the "thing-in-itself". The phenomenon is a composite uniting the provisional with the universal, and Kant had to feel it to be so reactive once Hume and Leibniz made their points known. Husserl reminds us to look beyond the ego-soul of Descartes, and to look beyond the dualism where Kant got stuck. Every feeling is such a composite, so every feeling is also a phenomenon. Every feeling holds the slightest spark of awareness. I might add that every law of nature given by an equation is experiential in the sense that the law is first conceived in the mind, and then later is it empirically verified. Therefore, the law as an equation is abstraction that forgets the experiential. Because natural laws are experiential they involve feelings, and therefore these laws are phenomenological too. It is not surprising that Husserl is very critical of objective philosophy and positive science that has lost track of the subjective ingredients that come with all phenomenon. Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1236 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1235-1237 Smith, S. P. Review of Edmund Husserl’s Book: Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology Husserl tells us that meaning may become lost in history, and meaning relates to the preconditions of history which has to do with the geometrical horizons that history grows into. Husserl (page 49) is translated to write: "The geometry of idealities was preceded by the practical art of surveying, which knew nothing of idealities. Yet such a pregeometrical achievement was a meaning-fundament for geometry, a fundament for the great invention of idealization; the latter encompassed the invention of the ideal world of geometry, or rather the methodology of the objectifying determinations of idealities through the construction which create `mathematical existence.'" Science grew out of traditions, and geometry is no less a tradition. The pregivens are found sleeping, Husserl tells us that the pregivens are taken for granted. Husserl (page 69) writes: "Only a radical inquiry back into subjectivity - and specifically the subjectivity which ultimately brings about all world-validity, with its content and in all its prescientific and scientific modes, and into the `what' and the `how' of the rational accomplishments - can make objective truth comprehensible and arrive at the ultimate ontic meaning of the world." In Husserl day (right before World War II) positivist science and existential philosophy lost their meaning (I add that the meaning is still lost today), as these were all about extensions of the status quo that were no longer connected to their original preconditions. To find the original meaning there must be a reactivation of the construction of geometry, among other exercises. Husserl tells us that meaning is discovered by reactivating the construction that have hid themselves in history. This leads us to what is self evident and beyond doubt. The precondition of history is the stark reminder that the universal has connected with the provisional; this is the stark mystery of life, the relation again. Husserl's phenomenology studies the precondition as it is, rather than through presumptions that derive from an extended historicism that has lost its meaning. Husserl has much to say about intentionality, and the validation that is always sought when truth statements are attempted. And we all see people that seek validation; the pay received for a hard days work; the affirmation that is required when gifts are exchanged; the suicide note that betrays its own reason for being, as no message is needed to announce a departure unless the issue of validation is found even in the confused. We see the need for validation in others, but can we also see it in ourselves too? Ask yourself if you seek validation in all your activities? Am I to expect an angry reaction, a denial? If so, an emotional reaction (the phenomenon again) that denies validation is an emotion that is found announcing its need for validation. In which case, the announcement is only concealed from you, but the meaning is clear to me and others that the answer is found to be yes again. If emotion is not expressed, and the answer is - yes -, then there is no disagreement. Therefore, the challenge remains to answer - no - while expressing a more reflective emotion. This challenge may be impossible to meet, as a calm denial today may follow by an angry release tomorrow, and this will cause me to return to my original conclusion: that the intentionality that seeks validation is a universal, and leads to Husserl's intersubjective person. But note also the emotional issues. It is no wonder that Husserl takes his phenomenology into psychology. This drive to seek validity is what gives birth to our "objective" meanings, according to ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1237 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1235-1237 Smith, S. P. Review of Edmund Husserl’s Book: Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology Edmund Husserl, but note I put objective in quotations to refer to the observation that I am referring to a subjective transcendentalism rather than an objectivity that Husserl tells us is illusory. Science and logic can give us no help if the emotional temperament is missing, yet scientism is found today expressing its need for validation. Dawkins's "The God Delusion" is an expression that is asking religiosity to love science too. But how can religion love science if scientism lacks the emotional certitude to deal with its own pregivens? It is not unsurprising that atheist Sam Harris is now making a call for contemplation within atheistic circles. Contemplation delivers the reflective capacity to deal with our drive for validation, for both believer and nonbeliever. Husserl (page 168) writes on elementary intentionalities that seek validity: "The being of these intentionalities themselves is nothing but one meaning-formation operating together with another, `constituting' new meaning through synthesis. And meaning is never anything but meaning in modes of validity. Intentionality is the title which stands for the only actual and genuine way of explaining, making intelligible." All objective philosophy and positive science are unreal, that is, they all depend on pregivens that are subjective in nature. To question the pregivens is to enter phenomenology, and it is here that psychology transforms itself into Husserl's transcendental phenomenology. All "objective" science requires its purification by a transcendental psychology. Husserl (page 257) writes: "a pure psychology as positive science, a psychology which would investigate universally the human beings living in the world as real facts in the world, similarly to other positive sciences (both sciences of nature and humanistic disciplines), does not exist. There is only a transcendental psychology, which is identical with transcendental philosophy." All of our beliefs are dependent on Husserl's pregivens, and to explore the pregivens is to enter the transcendental world that rediscovers hidden meanings of dimensionality. This activity engages our emotions, and so it is that the innate feeling is found supporting a universal grammar. As long as we remain true to our purpose, to love our self, to love others, to love God, we may always re-look at our slumber and find the hidden dimensions in our own mistakes; we can always overcome our feelings of doubt in this way, finding a deeper feeling expressed in a deeper beauty. This allows us to purify our feelings, by referring to the original intention that was never meant to do harm to ourselves, others or God. Husserl's universal drive that seeks affirmation is no more than the past that seeks wholeness with the present, it is no more than what I call the affirmation of Trinity, it is the work of the Holy Spirit among our vast plurality. This insight was meant to be shared, but in sharing this expect the emotional outcries that are found seeking their own validation. References Edmund Husserl, 1970, Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Northwestern University Press. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

390 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 390-390 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Frederick D. Abraham Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Frederick D. Abraham Gregory M. Nixon* I thank Abraham (2010) for his schooling me on Heidegger and Derridean deconstruction. Especially important, I think, is the notion that any creation, perhaps especially linguistic, cannot help but obscure as much as it reveals. Choices must be made and directions chosen. This very insight reveals how symbolization and mythmaking are always in some way a disguise. My essay, “Hollows of Experience,” which Mr. Abraham is critiquing, cannot help but be so, too, but I have striven to call forth the labyrinth of our confusion (as in my frontispiece from Klossowski) so my nonreferential concepts (like hollows of experience) may open a doorway that indicates a possible way out. Derrida does indeed indicate that the metaphysics of presence is an illusion. I take this to mean that one effect of living within the symbolic is that we live in a time-delayed reality. When we discovered speech, we expanded the space or, rather, the time, between the stimulus and the response, but it also takes time to process incoming information through memory, to recognize it according to our memory structures, and to choose a response from remembered responses or none at all. In this way, our very perceptions are of events that have already happened. Our self is the “bag of memories,” as Ken Wilber once put it, through which we consciously experience, and nothing is but what is not. Thus my suggestion, from Merleau-Ponty, that the way out of labyrinth of self may be found in direct, unmediated contact with what we once were in the hollows of memory, and from which we can move forward or outward only when we recognize our new identities in each other and our world. For me, however, such liberation is far from the social or political sense. I hint at a highly personal transcendence (of the ego-structures that keep us conscious only through selfhood) that is yet transpersonal. It is the death of the self, feared by all selves, but yearned for with increasing desperation by the unconscious soul of us all. As Theodore Roethke expressed it in “In a Dark Time”: Death of the self in a long, tearless night, All natural shapes blazing unnatural light. References Abraham,F. D. (2010) Brief comment on Gregory Nixon’s Hollows of experience: Derrida. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 338-341. Nixon,G. M. (2010) Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

464 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 464-465 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Timo Järvilehto Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Timo Järvilehto (The Organism-Environment System) Gregory M. Nixon* Finnish research psychologist Timo Järvilehto has developed what he calls the organism-environment theory, which, in its overall shape, appears very similar to my distinguishing between experience in itself and experience that, through the crossing of the symbolic threshold into formal language, has become conscious of itself. In my view, the organism-environment theory is probably too subtle to have caught on, but it is a very coherent and bold insight into the human condition in any case. As Järvilehto wrote in TA-77 on the Karl Jaspers Forum (2004): “Thus, according to the organismenvironment theory the world that may be described appeared with the appearance of human consciousness. Consciousness was created in a system of several individuals when their actions were joined in the achievement of common results. This joining was possible through communication which later developed to language. As communication was needed primarily for the production of common results, language developed primarily for the description of the common results that were intended or achieved” (sec. 10). Before consciousness of selves united by culture in a world, there were only organisms experiencing interaction in particular environments. I could not agree more. I take seriously Järvilehto’s different notion that consciousness arose from “a new kind of organization of organism-environment systems, as an aspect of the social organiza– tion based on cooperation of individual systems for shared or common results,” but because of his emphasis on conscious experience emerging from intersubjectivity (rather than isolated in the individual), I feel a kinship here. It is with his instrumentalist notion of “common results” as the prime motivator of language development that we may have some difference. It seems to me non-formal linguistic structures, sometimes called protolanguage, would have been all that’s needed for such common results. Based on naming words and gestures, practical or common results could be achieved. Formal language – or the FLN, “faculty of language in the narrow sense” that only humans have, as opposed to the more global signal communications of the FLB, “faculty of language in broad sense” (Hauser, Chomsky, & Fitch, 2002) – on the other hand consists of abstractions made possible through rearranging the syntax of speech primarily via recursion, displacement, and open-endedness. Contrary to Järvilehto, I believe humans needed the ability to create abstract concepts for events and entities not present because of their need for semantics, that is, their need for meaning. Formal language arose as communal mythmaking to deal with the crisis of mortal knowledge, knowledge that death was inevitable for everyone. By using the abstract imagination to create images or tell stories of invisible Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 465 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 464-465 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Timo Järvilehto gods and unseen realms, we were able to identify our existence with the cycles of Nature, in which winter was followed by a new spring and from death grew life. Formal language, unlike the more practical protolanguage (to which I believe Järvilehto mostly refers), arose because of the need to deny or surpass death and discover the enlarged world of the sacred (the long ago, the far away, the yet to come, and the invisible yet present) in which death was but a passing phase. Today, the sacred realm has been explained by science, and we consider such things as the origins of life and time, the possible end of the universe, or the birth of galaxies so far away they no longer exist by the time we see them to be almost commonplace or, if not commonplace, at least secular. We can even trace our ancestry without feeling the need to give a burnt offering to their memory. The sacred realm has become the world we live in, even though most of it exists in the symbolic imagination and is not immediately visible to the senses. I realize Järvilehto is much more down to earth in his theorizing as to the origin and nature of speech (and thus of conscious experience), and I admit I probably have much to learn from him. But it is clear we both agree that most cognitive processing and emotional experience take place non-consciously, and that conscious experience is a group attainment made possible through language. References Hauser, M., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W.T. (2002). The faculty of language: What is it, who has it, and how did it evolve? Science, 298, pp. 1569-1579. <http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20021122.pdf> Järvilehto, T. (2004). Is there an ultimate essence of matter? The Karl Jaspers Forum (KJF) online: http://www.kjf.ca/77-TAJAR.htm Järvilehto, T. (2010) Consciousness as Shared and Categorized Result of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 369-371. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

1198 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Essay Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Chris King* ABSTRACT Critical to the investigation of consciousness is that it is existentially completely different from the objective physical world description, being experienced directly only by the subject, and not being subject to the same criteria of replicability a physical world experiment has. Also the observer cannot control their consciousness objectively in the same manner a physical experimentalist can their equipment, because any attempt to change consciousness carries the observer into a new conscious situation as well. In this respect the exploration of consciousness has similarities to quantum measurement. This renders all forms of introspection made as if we are looking at consciousness objectively, completely, or partially invalid. Key Words: consciousness, enigma, observer, subjective, physical world, quantum measurement. The inner space of consciousness is sometimes able to perceive kaleidoscopic 'mindscapes', as if they are genuine perceptions of a 'world out there'. How does the brain evoke these realities and what is their status, By comparison with the subjective experiences we have of the real world? This article is an exploration of where discovery about the human understanding of consciousness might be headed and why looking for answers may require a completely novel approach to understanding reality, different from anything we have encountered so far. * Correspondence: Chris King http://www.dhushara.com E-Mail: chris@sexualparadox.org ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1199 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness The Scientific Lesson for Subjective Consciousness In scientific terms, subjective consciousness remains the one phenomenon for which the description of physical reality has at this point not even the beginning of an explanation for. Although we know our subjective experiences are somehow a product of our brain states, we really have no idea of how a bunch of neurons firing off electrical impulses can come to generate all our conscious perceptions, dreams, memories and reflections of the world around us with all their diverse attributes, each of which is as indescribably different as a kaleidoscopic pattern of colour or a living landscape is to a musical symphony or even a complex cacophony of natural sound. However the lesson of the scientific revolution shows us some important potential features of the quest for understanding consciousness that may be key to making real progress. The scientific revolution didn't come easily, because nature revealed itself to work in subtle ways that violated the simplistic assumptions of traditional, and particularly religious thought. It turned out that the Earth was neither flat, nor the centre of the universe, which, rather than being an airy heaven, in which angels with feathery wings could dwell, has turned out to be a maelstrom of black-holes and galactic collisions, in which life can take a foothold only on the surfaces of small rocky planets around small sun-like stars. Even more perturbing, all life, far from being created by God, like clockwork toys in his image, appears to have emerged spontaneously from the slime, in a de-novo chemical synthesis, followed by the hit-and-miss process of mutational evolution, with humanity gracing the planet in a tortuous sexually-procreative journey of successful mutation through fish, reptiles and monkeys, a scenario which remains to this day the bane and nemesis of religious fundamentalists. To cap the bag, we now understand the universe to be created almost from nothing, in a symmetrybroken cosmic inflation, whose mathematical complexity defies our imagination and ingenuity, despite many valiant ongoing efforts. As well, fundamental physics has entered into the mysterious territories of quantum uncertainty and quantum entanglement, altering forever our classical notions of temporal causality and physical reality. We need to learn from the lessons of science's attempts to discover the nature of the real world, which has challenged our best minds through the centuries, and open ourselves to the possibility that consciousness, as we know it, is at least as unfamiliar to our preconceived notions as the physical universe has proved to be. The Existential Dilemma and its Traditional Approaches Nevertheless, the nature of consciousness is an urgent question which plunges right into the crucible of our psyche, because it leads to the ultimate existential anxieties: "What happens to me when my physical body dies?" "Is there any meaning in life if there is no after life after death?" "Is there a God looking after our fate?" "Am I a tiny part of a cosmic mind?" "Is there anything out there that cares, or are we just ships passing in the night alone, despite our delusions of love and togetherness amid frank exploitation of one another and of the natural world?" For all the apparent solidity of the physical and biological world description, we are and remain ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1200 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness throughout our loves conscious sentient beings, and it is only through the conduit of subjective consciousness that we come to witness the physical universe at all. And it is the stream of our subjective conscious impressions of reality that are all we have and that in which all our dreams and hopes and fears are enmeshed, despite the world we consciously perceive around us. Dreaming can evoke bizarre realities which, despite seeming to be physically impossible, are palpably real (Oscar Dominguez "Memory of the Future”). This brings us rapidly back to the traditional answers to the existential dilemma, which present themselves most dominantly as religious beliefs. The monotheistic myth goes roughly as follows: "Yes there is a God - in fact the one true God of reality acting in history, unlike those other pagan idols, and who, despite being the creator of the entire universe, is also a moral deity who is 'jealous' of our fidelity to Him and might cast us into hell fire if we stray from unswerving belief in His power, majesty and commandments. Despite the protestations of religious believers, this model of conscious existence is fatally flawed, because we now know that morality is a social manifestation, which takes root in a species as an evolutionary strategy which enhances inter-group dominance by reducing intra-social strife. In no way can any culturally-derived or revealed doctrine of moral causality be dominant over the reality of evolution and the wide variety of ecological niches evolution fills, from nutrient-giving plants through herbivores and carnivores to parasites and diseases. The idea of a God which created nature and the entire universe stipulating any sort of moral imperative, let alone a final eschatology, is in complete contradiction to the open-ended indiscriminate mutational exploration and sheer creativity of the evolutionary paradigm, just as is the idea of a God creating the entire physical universe being in any way jealous of our fidelity is a contradiction in terms. While the notion of a moral deity is a false projection of human cultural, sexual and social imperatives, the notion of a fall from paradise culminating in an apocalyptic awakening, amid heroic redemption, is a valid part of our collective emergence. The fall and awakening are to a considerable extent a real time description of our collective falling out, across the generations, from gathererhunter interdependence with nature, through the rise and fall of civilizations amid tumult and discord, to the present explosion of scientific knowledge (and technological and commercial exploitation of the planet) - a process of continuing culture-shock, arriving on the horizon at a greater understanding of our place in the universe. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1201 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Religious visions of heaven and hell are not real physical worlds, but projections of the mind realm. They contain a confused and delimited mixture of real world impressions of people, with mythical figures of paradise and monsters, with the heavenly host falling somewhere between. By contrast, there is another major theme that comes out of Eastern mysticism that is considerably different. The idea goes as follows: In some sense, we, as conscious perceivers caught in the mortal coil of a physical body, are also in some sense manifestations of the cosmic mind, and if we enter into deep meditation we can learn to become one with the Atman, or the Buddha mind, or the Upanishadic 'Self' - the universal seed spark within all sentient beings. In some sense we than become avatars of the one cosmic 'Self', just as the Hindu Gods and Goddesses are in some sense archetypes of the existential condition. This comes closer to being a valid exploration of the conscious condition and has some root insights, but like the monotheistic myth, it suffers from intractable contradictions, including the notion that nature is merely a delusory gross manifestation subservient to mind, in an overarching moral imperative which causes lustful humans to be reincarnated as animals and vice-versa, and the entire natural world becomes relegated to being merely a cyclical process to refine the (human) ego to the vacuous purpose of attaining oneness with the void and thus escaping eternal suffering. The is a mind dominant fallacy that fails to respect that the diversity of nature, far from being a mere illusion, generates the entire physical basis for our conscious existence. The meditative quest for 'enlightenment' through becoming one with the cosmic "self' or void It also introduces the notion of karma in everyday affairs, suggesting that you might end up suffering a nasty accident, or catching a disfiguring disease as a punishment for your egotistical bad actions. This again is a moral causality that clearly runs counter to the needs of life to survive uncluttered by a fantastic causality that runs counter to survival of the organism and the evolution of its genes even when expressed in predatory and parasitic behavior - for carnivores to ruthlessly hunt and kill and even sometimes to torture their prey in honing their hunting prowess. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1202 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness There are of course many other descriptions of sentient existence, spanning the creation myths of diverse cultures and the shamanistic and prophetic experiences of their various medicine men, diviners, seers, mystics and visionaries, each with their own stories to tell of the vision quest of conscious existence and its relationship with the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune in the world at large. At best, these become first person accounts of personal experiences and mental voyages, which take us into the territory of the sensitivity of consciousness to apparently supernatural, or paranormal influences, in which one might sense the death of a relative, encounter unpredictable coincidences of fate, or dream prophetic dreams which later appear to come true in real life. At worst they become distracting and delusional fantasies that gain all the features of superstitious beliefs, and cargo cult like mystification. Where is the Consistency in the Visionary Theatre? This leads to a basic question. If there is a collective conscious reality out there, shouldn't it be reflected in some way in our mental condition, in our inner meditation and reverie and in our prevailing collective beliefs? If there is 'life' out there in the conscious realm, why are our descriptions of it so idiosyncratic, conflicting and contradictory? There are a host of reasons for this, some practical and biological, to do with brain function, and others to do with cultural imperatives. We need to take stock of all of these before coming to a synthesis of how we might approach the question of consciousness. Some mental constructions, such as heaven and hell moral fantasies, are culturally derived from the strong influence major religions have as forces shaping the moral destiny of a culture, quite independently of, and in obvious contradiction to, their truth as a description of the transcendent. Both Deuteronomy and much of the Qur'an deals with unabashedly worldly moral and legal issues, in particular the desire of men to have reproductive control over their women folk and to set them in a partially subservient relationship, as well as driving the formation of powerful large societies of believers, who can gain dominance over perceived enemies and infidels. Other mental phenomena arise as a reflection of the needs of brain function biologically to compensate for the pressures of daily life and its potential threats to existence and survival. Dreaming remains an enigmatic source of many prophetic and visionary experiences. The nature and rich hallucinogenic content of dreaming remains mysterious, despite extensive scientific investigation. Virtually all of us have had dreams whose richness and power appear every bit as real as waking life experiences, although often much more bizarre, and indeed the only way to subjectively distinguish dream and reality is often a tortuous set of reality checks, such as turning off the light switch and finding the room is still illuminated. Otherwise dreams can seem every bit as real as daily life. Clearly sleep and the rich REM phases of dreaming have something to do with processing of waking events, either setting down long-term memories, or responding to existential crises which might affect our chances of future survival, but none of this explains the rich, unpredictable and completely bizarre experiential content of many dreams. Dreaming teaches us that almost anything that could be ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1203 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness synthesized in the Cartesian theatre of consciousness can appear in dreams, from effortless levitation, to being sucked into the mouth of a giant medusa, or being lost on another galaxy or in another universe, with no clue as to how to find the way back to Ixtlan, or the real world we are familiar with. Likewise, various drug and plant induced psychedelic states can manifest visions it would be impossible to experience in the physical world at large. These include kaleidoscopic synesthesias, as well as visionary scenes, sensations of going beyond one's bodily confines, as well as a feeling of conscious interplay with the natural world and its psychic subtleties. Huichol nierika or cosmic portal through which the voyager can pass during a peyote vision quest Again these may be a function of altered brain dynamics, so that one becomes able to perceive in conscious form the dynamic modulations across the cortex induced by these agents, and some of the processes by which the senses are synthesized in consciousness. Thus cultures that use psychedelic species as sacrament tend to explain their existential cosmology in terms of visionary portals or doorways through which one is transported to another reality by the sacramental experience. Similar considerations apply to a variety of forms of meditation and contemplation, which may also involve stopping the internal dialogue by mantras and/or involve complex visualizations of mandalas not dissimilar in kind to psychedelic kaleidoscopic visions. These techniques also extend to sensory and/or physical deprivation and so called near death experiences in which people see their life flashing before their eyes, and may claim to meet a luminous entity which is at once themselves and at the same time the 'cosmic mind' meeting them. Again this may be real, but it may also be explained as the product of the extreme, yet living brain state the person was in. Likewise some people report journeys out of the body, which are probably a form of hypnagogic trance on the border of sleep, as they show similarities to levitating dreams, except that they appear to be in the real world environment of the observer, rather than a fantastic dream scene. Subjective Consciousness and the Objective Brain One of the ways science tries to explore consciousness is to do experiments eliciting certain brain states while a person is having their brain scanned, either electrically by EEG or MEG encephalograms or physiologically by fMRI or PET, which use magnetic resonance or radioactive scintillation imaging to picture changes in blood flow or nutrient consumption in specific areas. These tend to show what kinds of brain activity or activation are associated with certain kinds of conscious perception, thought or emotion. It can then become possible to see how changing brain activity parallels changes in conscious perception and it can lead to some general hypotheses about how the brain might generate conscious experiences. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1204 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness (Left) Brain activity associated with language and (right) local parallel processing of color and motion in vision. Although brain scanning has made it possible to associate specific regions of the cortex with specific aspects of conscious thought and experience, these are just correspondences between biological brain states and perceived conscious events. We still have no idea how the brain actually generates subjective consciousness. For example the gamma frequency band of the EEG has been suggested to be the excitations the brain uses in active conscious processing and it has been suggested that those networks which rise and fall together 'in phase' constitute conscious processes when they tie together various regions of the cortex into a consistent global dynamical system, by contrast with local processing, which is believed to be unconscious or subconscious. However these sorts of investigation leave unanswered how the brain makes these global excitations into the internal model of reality which we experience subjectively and identify with the real world around us, or indeed how or why subjective consciousness exists in addition to the computational capacity of the brain as a neuro-system. Because no simple chemical explanation seems to have the right existential status to deal with subjective experience, the problem may need to be solved by examining more exotic physics in the brain, such as quantum entanglement, which might lead to new forms of physical interaction which might solve the problem of existential subjectivity. Subjective Consciousness as the Existential Complement of the Physical Universe Critical to the investigation of consciousness is that it is existentially completely different from the objective physical world description, being experienced directly only by the subject, and not being subject to the same criteria of replicability a physical world experiment has. Also the observer cannot control their consciousness objectively in the same manner a physical experimentalist can their equipment, because any attempt to change consciousness carries the observer into a new conscious situation as well. In this respect the exploration of consciousness has similarities to quantum measurement. This renders all forms of introspection made as if we are looking at consciousness objectively, completely, or partially invalid. It also means that attempts to imagine or model subjective consciousness, or the mental realm, based on objective concepts derived from the physical universe, are invalid because the fundamental properties of the subjective and objective realms are complementary, as opposed to identical, through ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1205 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness the symmetry breaking between mind and body. While the physical universe is a process of waveparticle complementarity, in which particulate matter is divisible into real world objects, mind is 'indivisible' in the manner of a 'wave complement' in the sense that it remains the integral field of view embracing all perceivable phenomena, continuous, or discrete. Likewise it is participatory and private in a way which renders objective investigation inoperative. The exploration of consciousness is thus not the same kind of process as that of the physical world. It is a journey, not a destination. It is a subject experiencing, not an object of investigation. Thus it is not appropriate to try to 'examine' consciousness in the manner of an observation of the real world, but rather exploring it is a 'trip', as the first LSD users, and the sacred mushroom shamaness Maria Sabina, alike have put it, which is where the vision quest of shamanism also takes its journey. One very positive feature of sacramental shamanism is that it is a visionary experience that can in principle be entered into by anyone in the first person, removing all the disconnections, confabulations and mystifications between the religious follower and the numinous mysterium tremendum that occur with religions governed by gurus, priests, bishops, ayatollahs and muftis, which, rather than being an exploration of the numinous, lead to corrupt religious hierarchies espousing doctrines calculated to preserve their own hegemony. (Right) San painting of the healing or trance dance Lonyana Rock Kwazulu-Natal. Shamanic trance dancing (centre) in which each participant can witness the world beyond the real world goes back to the emergence of human culture. (Left) San use of dagga or cannabis smoking from a hole in the ground. Other ancient pygmy forest cultures utilize the hallucinogenic iboga plant. However, like the previous attempts to understand whether consciousness has any absolute collective nature, we need to remain cautious about the products of psychedelic vision, because these have also led to their fair share of frankly delusional and occasionally violent notions and no definitive conscious cosmology has emerged from many centuries of cultural use of hallucinogens. Nevertheless they are pivotal natural catalysts in the empirical exploration of subjective consciousness. The Evolutionary Foundation of Subjective Consciousness To better understand consciousness and the limitations on any speculative ideas of the cosmic ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1206 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness conscious connection, we need to ponder how consciousness came about through evolution, and the evolution of the brain. A likely explanation is that consciousness is an indirect manifestation of the chaotic excitations we see in the electroencephalogram and that it arose in evolution as an offshoot of chaotic excitability in single-celled eucaryotes, which would have provided a multi-sense organ, through the sensitivity to perturbations chaotic excitation provides. A chaotically excitable cell would thus become sensitive to all forms of quantum perturbation of the cell membrane including those of primitive vision, audition and olfaction, as well as electric fields in the medium. The evolutionary idea of consciousness is that this excitability aided the organism in anticipating threats to its survival, as multi-celled organisms evolved from simple nerve nets, as in hydra, to central nervous systems. Notably many of the critical neurotransmitters involved in changes in consciousness in humans are spread widely across the metazoa down as far as the slime mold, and indeed have distinct psychotropic effects, for example on the web building behavior of spiders. A critical aspect of this is the idea that such excitations aided anticipating future threats to survival suggesting consciousness is integrally coupled with the notion of free will, or intentional will, which forms another paradox about human activity and existence. All of us feel we have a basic autonomy of choice over our actions and indeed all the provisions of the law, as well as all moral and ethical precepts, revolve around the notion of personal accountability that we can understand the consequences of our actions and can exercise personal control over our affairs. However this leads to the notion of free will, which appears to be in frank conflict with the idea that our behavior is purely and simply a product of our brain state and its neuro-chemistry and that the notion that we have any purely conscious control over our physical brain states is a delusion. However this need not be true if the brain itself uses exotic quantum physics involving uncertainty in generating consciousness and in the sensitive transitions from chaos to order that may accompany insight learning and decision-making. Central to an accurate description of subjective consciousness in the universe is the fact that it is, so far as we know, exclusively a product and property of the living biota. In fact the brain forms the most complete interaction of the four fundamental forces of nature in global interaction. There is nowhere else in the universe, from black holes, to dark matter, or the center of stars, that we can plausibly expect to find the physical support for subjective consciousness that we find in the brain of humans, and by extrapolation those of other organisms which possess chaotically excitable brains. This means that religions posing God as an external agent consciously interacting with humanity, in lieu of humanity's own direct interaction with existential consciousness through our brains, is a fundamental dislocation of reality, removing the direct responsibility we have in participating in consciousness decision-making in our own brains and in taking responsibility for the effects of our actions on the planet, transferring it instead to a physically unrealizable contrivance, in which we become trapped in a moral causality, at the same time passing personal responsibility for our critical decisions on to the will of God. Even if God is posed as an entity beyond space-time and the universe, the reality is that it is consciousness itself which forms that natural complement to the physical world description. As ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1207 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Indian philosophy, the Tantric origin and Taoist cosmology put it, the cosmos is a complementarity between subjective and objective reality. Thus the conscious mind, which is the only veridical avenue we have to experience the world around us, may have a cosmological status complementary to the physical universe, despite being manifest in physical terms merely as the excitations of our fragile biological brains. This symmetry-broken complementarity between the diverse natures of consciousness and matter personified in the dance of Shiva as observer and Shakti as phenomena - is endlessly reflected in other symmetry-broken complementarities, between wave and particle and boson and fermion in physics, and female and male in biology, something we have termed the cosmology of sexual paradox. While we are standing today, with the benefits of brain science, combined with traditional contemplative techniques, and a diverse array of psychotropic substances, at the threshold of a great exploration of consciousness, which may be the cosmological free lunch the universe is destined to achieve over space-time, we need to realize that many preconceived notions of the purpose of consciousness, or collective consciousness cannot coexist with life as we now know it to be. For example, it is reasonable, however far-fetched it might seem, to imagine that consciousness might give us access to a form of super-causal quantum future-anticipation which might complement computational brain function to aid survival, but it is not reasonable to suggest that consciousness is there to make us subject to a moral conscience defying evolution's capacity to fill all viable niches, nor to engage in psychic materialism - subjecting conscious experience, by analogy, to constructions derived from the objective world, except in so far as these might be realized in brain function. Consciousness Arises from the Survival of Natural Life This brings us full circle to the ultimate questions and quest of conscious exploration. Why are we conscious? What is the meaning in conscious existence? Is there any connection out there with the cosmic mind or any other form of extra-corporeal dis-incarnate from of consciousness? One thing that is essential to this exploration is that life is sufficient unto itself as it stands without needing either the notion of an after-life or some connection of cosmic consciousness to justify it. We got here because the life force is forthcoming of itself. Although people vary and some people experience depression, partly as a result of genetic variations in brain chemistry, we exist at all only because the web of life has kept an unbroken chain all the way from when the first cells emerged. Life is therefore ultimately productive of itself and is worthwhile simply because it is. The fact that sentient life is also capable of being conscious of itself is a bonus which gives us the capacity to wonder, but it is invalid to turn the tables on life by requiring an after life in heaven to justify the mortal coil. The key to this is that we are not alone as conscious human beings. Although we have an evolutionary proclivity to procreate and reproduce our genes so that the generations of life continue, we all come to understand that our conscious existence is finite and bounded by our physical demise. Nevertheless we don't possess our consciousness but are simply conscious of the world and of ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1208 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness ourselves. This consciousness is in a fundamental sense a cosmological attribute which we manifest and which is manifest in each and every one of us in various ways due to individual difference but to a great extent consciousness is shared and in common. This is reflected in the abundance of so-called 'mirror neurons' in the brain which ensure that we are able to consciously experience situations the way others experience them and even feel another's pain. It is also reflected in the oneness that comes from sexual relationship, which is life's antidote to the mortality of the sexual being, in the procreative process and the family. Because we are mortal, caring is real, not just for the sexual beloved, offspring and kin, but for all mortal beings. Although some people may be violent, psychopathic or selfish, because we are all going to die one day and can't take our possessions with us, the reality of caring for others is what makes both the world, and our consciousness of it, real and worthwhile for each of us. We also leave behind us our humor, art, music and the products of our ingenuity and toil, so the more we contribute to the welfare of the world as a whole, to make it a richer and better experience for all, the better we will feel about life, death and mortality. This leads us to another fallacy promulgated by traditional religions, which is that the real world is somehow just a flawed secondary realm and that the real existence that makes it all worthwhile is in the after-life. This in turn brings about a sense of futility that if we are going to eventually die, the whole material quest is meaningless dust to dust and ashes to ashes. This is a false description of reality because life is not made worthwhile only because it is eternal, since the web of life is immortal over the vast epochs the planetary environment remains hospitable to life and we each share resonance with conscious existence. We need to keep a perspective of consciousness as a process occurring in space-time, in which the universe is becoming aware of itself through us becoming aware of ourselves during our sentient existence. Telling Stories Round the Camp Fire Sentient life is an open-ended awareness whose reality is maintained through the future passage of the ensuing generations of conscious life, so we need to respect preserving the robust fecundity of the planet and its living diversity as a primary task in furthering this quest, in contrast to the linear scorched-Earth eschatologies of monotheistic religion, which risk planetary catastrophe. Even if the earth is finally vaporized as the sun becomes a red giant and all life is extinguished the conscious quest in the all-embracing envelope of space-time was still the discovery process the universe was able to make to know itself in the alpha-to-omega of all reality space-time is. In some of my more mystical moments on natural sacraments, I have experienced cosmic consciousness as the bundle of life, as if we as incarnate mortal beings are in eternal communion with all conscious life throughout the universe, from beginning to end, and that when we can for a moment escape the knot in the bundle which our individual survival and ego hold tight and loosen the fibers, we too become one with the cosmic mind. However, rather than this becoming a description of consciousness, the way for us to move forward is to experience such potentialities for ourselves and keep the description process to personal ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1209 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1198-1209 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness anecdotes we tell, as conscious participants in the unfolding history of the universe, rather than setting it in stone, as some kind of objective description of how things are out there beyond our personal experience. This is the way people have told stories round the camp fire for the first 100,000 years of human emergence and it serves us well in the electronic age to keep the covenant with the ongoing flow of consciousness between us and among us all to celebrate it personally in our concourse together. Two very different TOEs attempting to integrate the forces of nature illustrate the intrinsic complexity of the cosmology of the physical universe. If cosmological attributes of subjective Consciousness are a basis of how the brain generates mind, they may have an even more complex basis. This is not to suggest that the model would be like the physical TOE if it exists but that it might have complementary attributes to it. The Intrinsic Complexity of Consciousness and the Ultimate Theory of Everything But there is another critical aspect to the nature of consciousness which is akin to the difficulty of discovering the theory of everything for the universe, and is so precisely because the conscious brain is the ultimate expression of the four forces of nature derived from the symmetry-breaking of the theory of everything. It requires all the forces acting in order of their symmetry-breaking energies to develop molecular matter, and their most complete complex interactive expression we know of is in the human brain. If the brain uses exotic properties of physics, embracing quantum entanglement in brain states in generating subjective consciousness as part of anticipating future risks to survival, these would be the ultimate interactive structures generated by the symmetry-breaking of the forces of nature in the universe. Understanding consciousness would then place it as the hard problem complementing the theory of everything, which would require at least as much ingenuity to resolve and therefore cannot be underestimated in the surprises we may find within it. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

391 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 391-392 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of William A. Adams Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of William A. Adams Gregory M. Nixon* I would like to thank Adams (2010) for his well-considered thoughts on “Hollows of Experience”. His praise is encouraging to me and his doubts give me much to consider. I especially like his summary of the questions I put before myself; in fact, Bill provides a nice summary overall. I especially like his succinct, “Language lets us (actually requires us to) objectify our experience into the idea of a mind-independent reality that can be studied by science.” And I blush to read his praise that “this essay is consistently engaging and thought provoking and for that, a worthwhile read,” for I aim at nothing else. It is important for me to repeat what I noted in the Preface/Introduction to this issue: My writing is not an unbiased scientific report of observed experimental evidence but more along the lines of aesthetic expression or even old school philosophy in that it is shamelessly speculative, though that speculation is based in reason, learning, observation, and, yes, intuition. Leaps of imagination were necessary to bridge some of the gaps in the theories with which I dealt and to provide a fully coherent vision. Bill expresses some frustration with the ambiguity of some of my material and that it is often not clear which side of an issue I am on, but that is the prerogative of such writing: it seeks to bridge the divide betwixt the binary oppositions of language by finding means to express the paradoxical no man’s land between or around them. However, Bill when Bill chides me, “Memories, thoughts, ideas, hopes, plans, regrets, questions, feelings, confusion, and much more, are all mental experiences, none of which necessarily depends on an environmental change,” he seems to have missed or misunderstood the central point I emphasize that experience, as such, is not the same as conscious experience. When we created a pause button between instinctual stimulus and response found in the rest of nature, likely through the symbolization of possible causes and actions, we vastly expanded our repertoire of choices. This is when we “found the time” to think. As far as we know, we humans are the only ones with such a constructed mental time, and thus we are the only ones to have exceeded natural, environmental, experiential, somatic reactions with “memories, thoughts, ideas, hopes, plans, regrets, questions, feelings, confusions, and much more,” the mental attributes Bill lists. Bill’s point inadvertently supports my view that we are different in kind from other animals. Bill is quite right that I use the word, nature, quite loosely, even occasionally capitalizing it. I do so out of a vast respect for all that is, a respect that borders on pantheism or maybe animism. Yet I do indeed realize that nature, like all concepts, is a Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 392 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 391-392 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of William A. Adams social construct with different meanings to different cultures. In point of fact, we can never really be separate from Nature, though we seem to have either escaped or been exiled from the self-regulating balance of nature with our leap into mind and limited freedom of the will. References Adams,W. A. (2010) Playing with your food: review of “Hollows of Experience” by Greg Nixon. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 342-345. Nixon,G. M. (2010) Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

393 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 393-394 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Syamala Hari Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Syamala Hari Gregory M. Nixon* I am not clear on all of the points mentioned in this commentary (Hari, 2010), but allow me to respond to the idea of computer consciousness. I have previously stated somewhere that having a living body ties us in with all other living bodies and living material in general. I contain DNA and genetic codes that have evolved through my ancestors and, before them, from prehuman life forms and the earliest cellular structures. The body that I am is a microcosmic focus of all life on a particular genetic pathway. The inborn experience that comes with being a living physical body is part of my life (make me, in turn, a part of all life) and is further the foundation of the culturally reflected consciousness that makes intersubjectivity and self-identity possible. At the bodily level, experiential interactions take place without my learned self-identity reflecting upon them, so experience without consciousness certainly does take place. We do, however, learn to become conscious of our own experiencing. Needless to say, our culturally-constructed conscious experience also infects unconscious somatic experience in itself, so consciousness does not just ride like a boat upon a sea of unconscious experience. It interacts with it in a circle of mutual creativity. Our minds are part of the future evolution of our bodies and of living nature itself. Computers, interacting with human minds, have advanced so quickly they can now do thoughtlike processing at a much faster rate with much larger chunks of data than any human or group of humans could ever manage on their own. Without doubt, much of our own conscious thinking and feeling is computational, acting and reacting in a linear cause and effect series, sometimes in parallel, sometimes not. In short, a powerful computer program can do everything a mind can do but better. Does that mean it is conscious, as in conscious of its own processing? I think the best answer is not yet. Complex multi-parallel processing can in principle allow computers to “observe” their own processing and even respond to it and change it. In that sense, consciousness has been attained. But this is not conscious experience. This is conscious processing since the computation is reflective only of further computation. So, to respond to Syamala’s question, I would say that advanced computer programs will become conscious but it is consciousness without experience. A consciousness not built on the base of experience is disconnected from the evolutionary history of life on this planet and exists without an instinctual teleology or carnal memories. It is a disembodied, heartless, parallel system of increasingly powerful computations whose only purpose has been programmed into them by human programmers with much less powerful computing programs in their heads. A human living only in a world of endless, tireless thoughts would be called insane. In computers to come, this may be called consciousness. Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 394 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 393-394 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Syamala Hari References Hari, S. (2010) Commentary on Nixon's “From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness.” Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 352-353. Nixon, G. M. (2010). From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness: The Continuum Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research, 1(3): 216-233. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 468-470 Smith, S. P. Review of Robert Lanza & Bob Berman's Book: Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe 468 Book Review Review of Robert Lanza & Bob Berman's Book: Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT Lanza`s book is not a rigorous scientific treatment, but the science he refers to is rigorous. Neither is his book a comprehensive philosophical development. Rather, Lanza has a colloquial style that is typical of good popular books, and his book can be understood by non-experts. This is a very important book for the right audience. You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Biocentrism-Consciousness-Understanding-NatureUniverse/dp/1933771690/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: biocentrism, life, consciousness, universe. Robert Lanza (page 30) writes about his boyhood curiosity: "I rolled logs looking for salamanders and climbed trees to investigate bird nests and holes in the trees. As I pondered the larger existential questions about the nature of life, I began to intuit that there was something wrong with the static, objective reality, I was being taught in school. The animals I observed had their own perceptions of the world, their own realities. Although it wasn`t the world of human beings - of parking lots and malls - it was just as real to them." Lanza then turns to the question of consciousness, and what looks to be reality. He (page 36) writes: "Some may imagine that there are two worlds, one out there and a separate one being cognized inside the skull. But the two worlds model is a myth. Nothing is perceived except the perceptions themselves, and nothing exists outside of consciousness. Only one visual reality is extant, and there it is. Right there. The outside world is, therefore, located within the brain or mind. Of course, this is so astounding for many people, even if it is obvious to those who study the brain, that it becomes possible to over-think the issue and come up with attempted refutations." Lanza (page 38) notes Benjamin Libet`s famous timing experiment, where "unconscious, unfelt, brain electrical activity occrred a full half second before there was any conscious sense of decision-making by the subject," and then Lanza misinterprets the results (in my view) by clinging to the classical notion of cause-and-effect. Lanza (page 39) writes: "What, then, do we make of all this? First, that we are truly free to enjoy the unfolding of life, including our own lives, unencumbered by the acquired, often guilt-ridden sense of control, and the obsessive need to avoid messing up. We can relax, because we`ll automatically perform anyway. " In other words, we are free because we are not free! And this tacit support for a one-sided cause-and-effect comes even as Lanza later claims that time is an illusion and while he is found rejecting an irreversible and on-flowing continuum of events (where cause precedes effect)! Clearly, if cause-and-effect is declared real enough to interpret Libet`s findings, then time must also be real enough. Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 468-470 Smith, S. P. Review of Robert Lanza & Bob Berman's Book: Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe 469 Nevertheless, Lanza does come to a correct conclusion in regard to Libet`s experiments. He (page 39) writes: "Modern knowledge of the brain shows that what appears out there is actually occurring within our own minds... Our external and internal perceptions are inextricably intertwined. They are different sides of the same coin and cannot be separated." Without saying it, Lanza is found endorsing a type of idealism (the belief that mind is fundamental), seemingly as extreme as George Berkeley`s idealism. It is this idealism that Lanza calls "biocentrism,"and it is the wellspring of life. Lanza turns to quantum mechanics to support his view of idealism. He (page 49) writes: "When studying subatomic particles, the observer appears to alter and determine what is perceived. The presence and methodology of the experimenter is hopelessly entangled with whatever he is attempting to observe and what results he gets. An electron turns out to be both a particle and a wave, but how, and more importantly, where such a particle will be located remains dependent upon the very act of observation." Lanza explains the fine tuning of universal constants. He (page 90) writes: "If the universe is in a nondetermined state until forced to resolve by an observer, and this non-determined state included the determination of the various fundamental constants, then the resolution would necessarily fall in such a way that allows for an observer, and therefore the constants would have to resolve in such a way as to allow life. Biocentrism therefore supports and builds upon John Wheeler`s conclusions about where quantum theory leads, and provides a solution to the anthropic problem that is unique and more reasonable than any alternative." After treating quantum theory and relativity theory, Lanza (page 106) asserts that time is an illusion: "That time is a fixed arrow is a human construction. That we live on the edge of all time is a fantasy. That there is an irreversible, on-flowing continuum of events linked to galaxies and suns and the Earth is an even greater fantasy. Space and time are forms of animal understanding - period. We carry them around with us like turtles with shells." To say that time is not well understood is one thing, but to assert that time is therefore an illusion seems unfounded to me. When forced to summarize his conclusion, he (page 111) backtracks from the bolder statements and writes only that: "Time does not have a real existence outside of animalsense perception. It is the process by which we perceive changes in the universe." I could add that time is real because mind and change are real. Lanza treats space the same way he treats time. He (pages 112-113) writes: "... Space and time are neither physical nor fundamentally real. They are conceptual, which means that space and time are of a uniquely subjective nature. They are modes of interpretation and understanding. They are part of the mental logic of the animal organism, the software that molds sensations into multidimensional objects." Lanza (page 181) writes: "Sights, tactile experience, odors - all these sensations are experienced inside the mind alone. None are out there except by the convention of language. Everything we observe is the direct interaction of energy and mind. Anything that we do not observe directly exists only as potential - or more mathematically speaking - as a haze of probability." The danger is to over prescribe Lanza`s brand of idealism, while ignoring more generalized varieties like Hegel`s idealism, or the monistic idealism described in Amit Goswami's "The Self-Aware Universe." The danger is to get caught up in word games, e.g., asserting that time and space are ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 468-470 Smith, S. P. Review of Robert Lanza & Bob Berman's Book: Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe 470 illusions because they are in the mind and while claiming the primacy of mind that underwrites idealism thereby partly contradicting the assertion. One can start with idealism and then immediately fall into a solipsism that asserts that the only real mind out there is my own; all others being illusions with time and space. The distinction between "materialism" and "idealism" is equally troubling because ultimately mere definitions are secondary to what is intended and what is self-evident. It may be productive to skirt this distinction, and merge Lanza's idealism with a A.N. Whitehead`s panpsychism. Good references would be Christen de Quincey`s "Radical Nature," and Henry P. Stapp`s "Mindful Universe." Lanza`s book is not a rigorous scientific treatment, but the science he refers to is rigorous. Neither is his book a comprehensive philosophical development. Rather, Lanza has a colloquial style that is typical of good popular books, and his book can be understood by non-experts. This is a very important book for the right audience. References Robert Lanza & Bob Berman, 2009, Biocentrism: How Life and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe, BenBella Books. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 214-215 214 Nils, N. J. Human Consciousness and Selfhood: Potential Underpinnings and Compatibility with Artificial Complex Systems Commentary Commentary on David Sahner’s “Human Consciousness and Selfhood” Nils J. Nilsson* ABSTRACT This is my brief Commentary on David Sahner’s “Human Consciousness and Selfhood: Potential Underpinnings and Compatibility with Artificial Complex Systems” in recent issue of JCER. My main point is that if a rich sensorium and extensive experiences are required for consciousness, machines will have, at least, those necessary conditions no less than humans do. Key Words: consciousness, machine, artificial intelligence, sensation, perception. It was with great interest that I read David Sahner’s article in the December 2010 issue of JCER (Sahner, 2010). As I understand one of his main points, at least some part of human consciousness depends on awareness of the "sensation" of perceptions. He states that since the human sensorium so complexly depends upon our bodies, it is doubtful that artificial agents could ever have an adequate perceptual basis for the rich sensations necessary to experience qualia, etc., and thus could not have the kind of consciousness that we humans have. Further contributions to our consciousness, he writes, come from the rich experiences we humans have in our cultural milieu, experiences that artificial agents cannot have. I don't think that artificial agents would necessarily be limited in the ways stated by David Sahner. For example, nano-sensory technology is making great strides in providing touch, temperature, and other "skin-like" sensors. Additionally, there are already robot vision systems with rather large retinas and the perceptual apparatus necessary to describe scenes, recognize faces, etc. I expect progress will continue to be rapid in machine visual perception. I could say similar things regarding sound perception. Sensory apparatus is available that perceives a wider frequency range of sounds than humans can perceive. Speech recognition is coming along fine, and I wouldn't doubt that software could be (maybe has been) designed to guess accurately whether a piece was composed by Beethoven or by Rachmaninov. David Cope at UC Santa Cruz has systems that can extract high-level features unique to the music of a particular composer and then "play those features backward" to produce never-before-heard Bach-like or Rachmaninov-like compositions. Thus, the ability of robots to "feel" pain or a comforting touch or to be transported into a state of ecstasy upon seeing a sunset or listening to the Moonlight Sonata wouldn't seem to be precluded by perceptual deprivation alone. Of course, the problem remains of how to convert perception into "sensation" (whatever that is) but that's a technical problem that may not be insolvable. David Sahner expresses sympathy for Nicholas Humphrey’s theory in which phenomenological “sensation” is grounded in internal recursive monitoring of perceptual stimulatory pathways within the human central nervous system. I suppose computers could also experience sensation through "internal recursive monitoring of perception" if that's what Correspondence: Professor Nils J. Nilsson, Dept. of Computer Science, Stanford Univ. http://ai.stanford.edu/~nilsson/ E-mail: nilsson@cs.stanford.edu ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| March 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 2 | pp. 214-215 215 Nils, N. J. Human Consciousness and Selfhood: Potential Underpinnings and Compatibility with Artificial Complex Systems it takes. And, although I take his point about "skin in the game" and agree that machines might not ever have as much of it in the game as humans, I do think they will have as much or more visual and auditory perception. David Sahner also claims that there are certain types of knowledge that simply cannot be conveyed to computers in the medium of language, but there are all kinds of "knowledge" that can be (and have been) imparted to computers without using language of any kind. Reinforcement learning methods (a kind of machine learning) can be used to teach computers various skills. Also, neural networks gather knowledge through training without using language. And most modern programs for translating languages depend on statistical analyses of large corpora of texts instead of being explicitly "programmed.” Robots may have a rich collection of experiences. They will drive on highways, work in factories and on farms, deliver the mail, do household chores and many other things. There is no reason why they couldn't "remember" everything they perceive and do. Their experiences will be different from those of people, just as yours are different from mine. Furthermore, since robot experiences are stored in their individual memories, they can be totally shared amongst them. That could give each of them a sort of "collective experience," enabling (possibly) a much richer sense of consciousness than any of us could have. Maybe the consciousness that evolves in machines will not be human in character. But it's also the case that different humans have many different "consciousnesses" themselves. Blind people, deaf people, and others with various sensory disorders (prosopagnosia, for example) have their own special and perhaps limited consciousnesses. People raised in Japan have a different kind of consciousness than those raised in Iowa. Perhaps all of these differences are slight compared to the difference between the "average human" and the most conscious robot. We'll have to see. The problem of consciousness may well be the last defense of those who would rather not view humans as "just" machines. But like all the other alleged barriers before it, I think it too will eventually be penetrated. The burden of proof, of course, is on those who would do so. Reference Sahner, D. (2010), Human Consciousness and Selfhood: Potential Underpinnings and Compatibility with Artificial Complex Systems. JCER 1(9): pp. 1210-1224. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

395 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 395-398 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Marc Hersch Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Marc Hersch Gregory M. Nixon* This is a tough commentary to which to respond for Hersch (2010) has written an important fulllength essay of his own. I relish reading his list of primary theses with which Hersch and I are in agreement, for they are the foundation of everything else in my articles and the essence of that which is most important to me. It’s good to know I am not alone in the perspective that culture creates mind and language creates culture. In a world in which scientific findings usually hold the trump card, our perspective has had to reach deep in order to finesse the bio-materialists. Hersch (2010), however, doubts the notion that mortal knowledge brought about an existential crisis that led to a realization of the sacred. He sometimes seems to assume that I mean to imply that the sacred realm is merely a fabrication to cover over our unbearable knowledge of life’s inevitable end. However, I refer to the “discovery-creation of the larger realm … we call the sacred” (my italics). By this I mean to indicate that the perceivable reality of both space and time has always been around us – we did not create it – but that it was neither previously “out there” nor were we previously “in here” observing it. Our lives were lived, like that of other animals, as a part of our natural environment, just a particular niche in an ecosystem. However, this environment that could be perceived by the bodily senses existed only in an eternal present and it was as limited as were the senses with which it was perceived. My thesis is that with the lifethreatening crisis of mortal knowledge the human awoke to his own existence and the mind itself now found a place between the environmental stimulus and the instinctual response system. In that place – or, better, that time, – the mind found a way to open the syntax of the protolanguage of gestures and nominatives and conceive of abstract concepts, concepts without immediately perceived referents. Imagination was born and finally we could speak together of the long ago, the far away, the yet-to-come, and even of invisible powers or the presence of ancestors that were not in the strict sense perceivable. This sudden expansion of reality is the mythic realm of the sacred, or it was to our ancestors. Today we have gained much knowledge and accept reality as extending well beyond what our senses can immediately perceive, but in our secular time the sacred realm is known simply as the world. It is still a vastly expanded reality from that of environmental participation. Its reality meant it was discovered, but our awakened imagination and intersubjective narratives also mean it was created. In my view, we now live in a reality that was once experienced as sacred, and hidden in the corners of its repressed imagination knowledge of our certain death continues to haunt us. That the self today still has “death at its core” is a thesis widely propounded in psychoanalytic circles (see, e.g., Becker, 1973; Brown, 1959). Beyond this, Hersch is quite right that, in my statement of the genetic imperative to survive and reproduce, I ignore cooperative communities, which are central evolutionary features, as well. I Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 396 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 395-398 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Marc Hersch did so to make my point and not entirely out of ignorance. The fact that cooperative communities often seem to go to war with other cooperative communities, however, underscores this genetic imperative. I do not, however, much subscribe to any form of social Darwinism, though the rule of genes and the reality of demographics cannot be denied. My point was merely that before somatic experience became fully conscious, we were more likely to act as our biology dictates, though clearly there had been strong social and even cultural groups going as far back in time as H. erectus, which may have mediated biology with rudimentary cultural forms. I certainly agree with Hersch that new categories of thought involved the prediction of future events. That is even clear from the archeological record. I’m not sure where he thinks I deny this. I base thought on emotions because I asked myself, why were predictions made? To what end was foreknowledge needed? And the answer was always to fulfill needs that emotions indicated needed to be fulfilled. We certainly did use our new conceptual categories to predict and to build a new cultural world, but we did so for two reasons: We were biologically and psychologically compelled to do so. The former involves the natural emotions (or, as Hersch would have it, feelings) that arise from our embodiment and the latter involves the emotions that arose in response to the existential crisis of mortal knowledge. We began to build, to expand, to fortify, to fight wars, and to create impenetrable ego-structures to avoid the unthinkable thought of our own death. And in my view we continue to do so. Hersch seems most strongly to resist the notion of the symbolic. We certainly share many behaviours with our animal brethren (including prediction), though their capacities for environmental interaction so often exceed our own. However, we are the only species that we know that symbolizes those behaviours and constructs reasons for them or tells tales about them. I can’t agree that (symbolic) culture is a “product” of conscious action; it is, instead, a simultaneous appearance. We cannot become conscious of our selves without intersubjectivity, and intersubjectivity is a cultural phenomenon. Certainly, as indicated in “Myth and Mind” there must have been a very long period of protolanguage and thus protoculture (cultural practices without obvious symbolic forms) before crossing the symbolic threshold. H. erectus certainly had to at least pass on the templates for basic stone toolmaking, fire-management, and an array of primitive cultural behaviours. When the human mind appears, it is already the primary aspect of symbolic culture, and such a culture could not exist without the symbolic mind. They are twin creatures. Still, Hersch’s thesis that symbolic interaction (i.e., language acquisition) emerged as an advanced form of predictive behaviour has much to recommend it. It certainly accounts for the blind spots of human culture but also provides the hope that we may yet be able to undo some of the destruction that nearly seven billion humans have wrought on this planet. Since we can predict the future, more or less, we can aim to improve our condition. But what if our condition, psychologically speaking, is part of the problem? What if our very egocentricity is what drives us to become a danger to ourselves and our world? Then the needed change is radical indeed. Hersch provides his own history of prehistory and I am much in accord with it. In fact, we each provide a list of important transitions in the human story. I am really drawn to the musical or, rather, rhythmic origin of human interaction that later becomes ritual and call and chat (self and other) primitive dialogue. However, I think it is too early in time, and the behaviours too concrete to call this the “emergence of the intersubjective conscious creature” as Hersch does. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 397 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 395-398 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Marc Hersch For me this is the pre-subjective, pre-conscious creature that is developing a primitive sort of communion with others that will lead to the foreknowledge of inevitable death before such an event can be precisely grasped as a concept. It is the later moment of conceptually grasping the truth of mortal knowledge that gives rise to the concomitant knowledge of self-existence. Consciousness awakens as the group gropes to come to terms with this startling two-sided coin of comprehension. As far as dealing with individual development, Hersch schools me (even though I have taught developmental theories for so many years). I too tend to favour the old idea that the development of the individual from the womb onwards loosely tends to recapitulate evolution – including in this case the cultural evolution of the self. Children’s fear of the dark and non-verbalized fear of abandonment speak of an almost innate fear of death. We forget the fears that arose when we were alone and the many magical ways we tried to dispel them. How many kids had trouble going to sleep after intoning the line in the old bedtime prayer, “If I should die before I wake”? It may well be that mortal knowledge is so at the core of mind and at the core of culture that it is passed on to children without any specific reference to it. However, that is but one point. I quite agree that children’s emergence into the freedom and responsibility of mature consciousness mirrors what may have occurred in our species, though this view is spurned as a cultural bias today. It is likely true that “Consciousness was first realized in relation to the group as a whole, and this marks the transformation of the troop to tribe”; however, I can’t agree that death knowledge plays only a minor role in tribal life. It is absolutely central, to my mind, accounting for the preservation of ancestral remains and their worship (to the point of eating those remains in some cases). Subconscious mortal knowledge also accounts for much of the other tribal behavioural forms in the same way it accounts for behavioural forms in larger civilizations. It is especially noteworthy in what we would call psychological aberrations, such as obsessive-compulsive or fetishistic actions (not even to mention religious and patriotic displays), but these have often been ritualized in archaic tribal cultures too. Of course, it is true that “the symbolic linguistic whole are elaborated and refined over time, but the overall tribal worldview – the narrative relation – can only be overthrown in revolutionary conflict spawned by overwhelming anomaly.” One has only to read Sorenson (1998) to verify this. The mythic bond is culture itself; it is selfidentity. It is even the stuff of individual consciousness. Hersch makes this point beautifully. Perhaps Hersch and I agree even more than he realizes. I quite agree that “Non-symbolic creatures do not anticipate death and therefore, cannot fear it. The symbolic concept of death, in the context of theoretic-relational narrative, must become reified before it can be felt as feared. This process of reification is the symbolic aspect that differentiates emotional experience from genetically programmed feeling experience.” In fact, I consider this the heart of my thesis. I also fully agree (and believe I said so) that mythic culture remains at the heart of our so-called theoretic culture. Hersch follows others, however, in distinguishing instinctual feeling from culturally constructed emotion, and I can accept the distinction. [Hersch, my suggestion of the control of fire as distinguishing humankind from all other animals is focussed on the element of control, not just fire watching. Fire drew people together for all that rhythmic drumming and dancing you conceive. However, my idea is that this was the birth of the tribal communion that led to the protolanguage of gesture and nominative pointing and thus to a ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 398 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 395-398 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Marc Hersch long period of pre-consciousness, going from H. erectus right into the early stages of H. sapiens.] I deeply appreciate the effort put forth by Hersch Hersch in writing this essay-length response. I admire his stringent thinking and have learned a few things from reading him, but I have seen nothing that makes me doubt that mortal knowledge is the existential crisis that drove us to become mythmaking humans in a vast sacred cosmos. In fact, sometimes in Hersch’s writings I seem to see that same avoidance of the most obvious fact of our lives that I see everyday, everywhere from global wars to the weather report (“We interrupt this program to warn you that a large storm is approaching…”). We have the need to deny death or to squirm away from facing it. I am aware that Hersch is accomplished sailor who has faced seas all over the world, so I am not accusing him of fearing death, as such, but it may well be that his courage and drive do greatly enhance his sense of being alive here and now, and is that not a form of death denial? References Becker, E. (1973). The Denial of Death. New York: The Free Press. Brown, N.O. (1959). Life Against Death. Middleton, CT: Wesleyan U Press. Hersch, M. (2010) The predictive mind and mortal knowledge. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 354-368. Nixon,G. M. (2010a) Hollow of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. Nixon,G. M. (2010b) Myth and mind: the origin of human consciousness in the discovery of the sacred. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 289-338. Sorenson, E.R. (1998). ‘Pre-conquest consciousness’, in H. Wautischer, ed., Tribal Epistemologies: Essays in the Philosophy of Anthropology (pp. 79-115). Aldershot UK: Avebury. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

400 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 400-401 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Steven M. Rosen Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Steven M. Rosen Gregory M. Nixon* I was very pleased to read the perspicacious commentary of Steven Rosen, even if he did take me to task for spending much time on a mere matter of semantics in “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience”. For me, however, semantics, the meaning we apply to words, matters. In the essay I suggest that we change our common usage to better illustrate the way non-human animals and perhaps even plants experience their world. To refer to such plants and at least nonmammalian animals as conscious – implying “in the same way we are conscious” – just does not seem right to me. Though I’ve been accused of anthropocentrism for avowing that only humans are conscious of their somatic experiencing, it seems to me that to assume our specialized form of conscious experience is the same form of experience in other animals and/or plants is the worst sort of anthropomorphism. It’s not the words “experience” or “consciousness” that matter, however, it’s the central idea that we humans have brought about some sort of major change in the way reality is experienced or transformed, and that way is a self-contextualized conscious way. It’s fine with me to refer to humans as being the only self-conscious animal and accepting that other animals are merely conscious but without a sense of inner self-identity – as long as we recognize (as the phenomenologists and existentialists do) that all human consciousness is selfconsciousness. Even when we think we are dealing directly with the world (and not thinking of ourselves), both that world and the self doing the dealing are filtered through the frame of selfhood. Dr. Rosen states: “I see no reason why the internalized sensations he refers to could not be considered rudimentary forms of consciousness, rather than as purely non-conscious experience.” Well, they can be considered such, in fact if experience leads to more complex experience and finally to conscious experience, such momentary sensations are indeed “rudimentary forms of consciousness”. But I emphasize that such experience is best considered non-conscious because it is not aware of itself and has no conceivable means of becoming aware of itself. What we humans call consciousness is, in reality, always self-consciousness, so we only make things more confusing when we refer to the consciousness of, say, a nematode or a cell, which almost certainly has no sense of subjectivity of which to be aware. Our world is an experienced world and our actions are experienced actions: When we become aware of such experiencing, the experience achieves a conscious quality. This seems to me more logic than a mere matter of semantics. Certainly experience is a continuum, but there is a huge tipping point once we have crossed the symbolic threshold and experience can twist back and apperceive itself. When Dr. Rosen turns to my speculations about void consciousness or, as I put it, awareness-initself, I am left pleasantly breathless from reading that he has put forth very similar, almost Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 401 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 400-401 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Steven M. Rosen identical propositions in his two books. If we disagree in a minor way on the semantics of things, I am overwhelmed to realize that we certainly do share similar concepts (that are perhaps more non-concepts) about the ultimate source and probable end of all our striving. This is an area I will certainly have to look into in greater detail, and Dr. Rosen’s books seem an ideal place to begin. References Nixon,G. M. (2010) From panexperientialism to individual self consciousness: The continuum of experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 216-233. Rosen, S. M. (2010) Comment on Gregory Nixon’s “From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness”. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 381-382. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

467 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 467-467 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentaries of Maurice McCarthy & Matt Sharkie Response to Commentary Response to the Commentaries of Maurice McCarthy and Matt Sharkie Gregory M. Nixon* Since both these commentaries share the same issue with my responses to them, I have not had much time to write in detail, but also both commentaries require little response. It is for this reason I respond to both in this space. I sincerely thank Maurice McCarthy for his extravagant praise at the beginning and ending of his commentary. How can I respond but with beaming pleasure to someone who writes that he “literally gasped” at what he was reading? However, McCarthy rather loses me in the middle sections with Biblical, legendary, and historical references I fail to grasp. I am in full agreement that we must realize our vaunted rationality is itself the myth of our times and we remain, in reality, mythmakers. Only in this way can we really get a sense of the conscious experience of our ancestors who felt themselves immersed in a sacred reality. We are creatures of autopoiesis: we create myths that in turn create us. All the logic and experimental science we can muster only work within this truth. The above applies even more to the poetry-rich commentary of Matt Sharkie. I was moved to read Sharkie’s praise for the literary quality of my work since my point is exactly that: we are made of our myths, images, and arts as much as we are made of our cells, nerves, and fibre. I blush to see that I missed my opportunity to add quotations from Eliot’s “The Hollow Men” that surely should have been destined to be in “Hollows of Experience” in the issue “Hollows of Memory”. Moreover, since I have been accused of being anthropocentic by some, Eliot’s poem would make clear I deeply feel our ascension into the freedom provided via language and symbol has also in some ways enclosed our experience. We have sacrificed Dionysos on the altar of Apollo and too often dynamic – orgiastic or mystical – experience-in-the-moment is lost to us. We talk, talk, and talk, but remain the hollow men, too afraid to lose the selves we have struggled so long and so hard within cultures to construct. I close with my favourite lines from another modernist poet, Theodore Roethke, from “In a Dark Time” (1964) who had his own ideas on losing the self but finding the light: Death of the self in a long, tearless night, All natural shapes blazing unnatural light. References McCarthy, M. (2010) A Compliment and a Supplement to Nixon. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(4): 449-450. Sharkie, M. (2010) Comments on Nixon’s Three Essays. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(4): 451-453. Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

1225 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1225-1228 Hankins, P. The Character of Consciousness Book Review David J. Chalmers: The Character of Consciousness Oxford University Press, USA, 2010, 624 pp. ISBN-10: 0195311108 The Character of Consciousness Peter Hankins* ABSTRACT It’s a good, helpful book; what the content lacks in novelty it makes up in clarity. Chalmers has a persuasive style, and his expositions come across as moderate and sensible (perhaps the reduced epiphenomenalism helps a bit). It’s surprising that the denial of materialism (surely the dominant view of our time) can seem so common sense. Key Words: consciousness, character, David Chalmers, materialism, dualism, hard problem, neural correlates of consciousness. The Conscious Mind was something of a blockbuster, as serious philosophical works go, so a big new book from David Chalmers is undoubtedly an event. Anyone who might have been hoping for a recantation of his earlier views, or a radical new direction, will be disappointed – Chalmers himself says he is a little less enthusiastic about epiphenomenalism and a little more about a central place for intentionality, and that’s about it. The Character of Consciousness is partly a consolidation, bringing together pieces published separately over the last few years; but the restatement does also show how his views have developed, broadening into new areas while clarifying and reinforcing others. What are those views? Chalmers begins by setting out again the Hard Problem (a term with which his name will forever be associated) of explaining phenomenal experience – why is it that ‘there is something it is like’ to experience colours, sound, anything? The key point is that experience is simply not amenable to the kind of reductive explanation which science has applied elsewhere; we’re not dealing with functions or capacities, so reduction can gain no traction. Chalmers notes – justly, I’m afraid – that many accounts which offer to explain the problem actually go on to consider one or other of the simpler problems instead (more contentiously he quotes the theories of Crick and Koch, and Bernard Baars, as examples). In this initial exposition Chalmers avoids quoting the picturesque thought experiments which are Correspondence: Peter Hankins, http://consciousentities.com, London, UK. E-mail: peter@consciousentities.com Note: This short book reviewed appeared on my blog “Conscious Entities” at http://consciousentities.com which the editor of JCER very kindly selected to appear here. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1226 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1225-1228 Hankins, P. The Character of Consciousness usually used, but the result is clear and readable; if you never read The Conscious Mind I think you could perhaps start here instead. He is not, of course, content to leave subjective experience an insoluble mystery and offers a programme of investigation which (to drastically over-simplify) relies on some basic correspondences between the kind of awareness which is amenable to scientific investigation and the experience which isn’t. Getting at consciousness this way naturally tends to tell us about the aspects which relate to awareness rather than the inner nature of consciousness itself: on that, Chalmers tentatively offers the idea that it might be a second aspect of information (in roughly the sense defined by Claude Shannon). I’m a little wary of information in this sense having a big metaphysical role – for what it’s worth I believe Shannon himself didn’t like his work being built on in this direction. The next few chapters, following up on the project of investigating ineffable consciousness through its effable counterparts, deal with the much-discussed search for the neural correlates of consciousness (NCC). It’s a careful and not excessively over-optimistic account. While some simple correspondences between neural activity and specific one-off experiences have long been well evidenced, I’m pessimistic myself about the possibility of NCCs in any general, useful form. I doubt whether we would get all that much out of a search for the alphabetic correlates of narrative, though we know that the alphabet is in some sense all you need, and the case of neurons and consciousness is surely no easier. Chalmers rightly suggests we need principles of interpretation: but once we’ve stopped talking about a decoding and are talking about an interpretation instead, mightn’t the essential point have slipped through our fingers? The next step takes us on to ontology. In Chalmers’ view, the epistemic gap, the fact that knowledge about the physics does not entail knowledge of the phenomenal, is a sign that that there is a real, ontological gap, too. Materialism is not enough: phenomenal experience shows that there’s more. He now gives us a fuller account of the arguments in favour of qualia, the items of phenomenal experience, being a real problem for materialism, and categorises the positions typically taken (other views are of course possible).    Type A Materialism denies the epistemic gap: all this stuff about phenomenal experience is so much nonsense. Type B Materialism accepts the epistemic gap, but thinks it can be dealt with within a materialist framework. Type C Materialism sees the epistemic gap as a grave problem, but holds that in the limit, when we understand things better, we’ll understand how it can be reconciled with materialism. In the other camp we have non-materialist views.   Type D dualism puts phenomenal experience outside the physical world, but gives it the power to influence material things, Type E Dualism, epiphenomenalism, also puts phenomenal experience outside the physical world, but denies that it can affect material things: it is a kind of passenger. Finally we have the option that Chalmers appears to prefer: ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1227 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1225-1228 Hankins, P. The Character of Consciousness  Type F monism (not labelled as a materialism, you notice, though arguably it is). This is the view that consciousness is constituted by the intrinsic properties of physical entities: Chalmers suggests it might be called Russellian monism. The point, as I understand it, is that we normally only deal with the external, ‘visible’ aspects of physical things: perhaps phenomenal experience is what they are intrinsically like in themselves – inside, as it were. I like this idea, though I suspect I come at it from the opposite direction: to Chalmers, it seems to mean something like those experiences you’re having – well, they’re the kind of thing that constitutes reality whereas to me it’s more you know reality – well that’s what you’re actually experiencing. Chalmers’ way of looking at it has the advantage of leaving him positioned to investigate consciousness by proxy, whereas I must admit that my point of view tends to leave me with no way into the question of what intrinsic reality is and makes mysterian scepticism (which I don’t like any more than Chalmers) look regrettably plausible. Now Chalmers expounds the two-dimensional argument by which he sets considerable store. This is an argument intended to help us get from an epistemic gap to an ontological one by invoking two-dimensional semantics and more sophisticated conceptions of possibility and conceivability. It is as technical as that last sentence may have suggested. To illustrate its effects, Chalmers concentrates on the conceivability argument: this is basically the point often dramatised with zombies, namely that we can conceive of a world, or people, identical to the ones we’re used to in all physical respects but completely without phenomenal experience. This shows that there is something over and above the physical account, so materialism is false. One rejoinder to this argument might be that the world is under no obligations to conform with our notions of what is conceivable; Chalmers, by distinguishing forms of conceivability and of possibility, and drawing out the relations between them, wants to say that in certain respects it is so obliged, so that either materialism is false or Russellian monism is true. (Lack of space – and let’s be honest, brains – prevents me from giving a better account of the argument at the moment.) Up to this point the book maintains a pretty good overall coherence, although Chalmers explicitly suggests that reading it straight through is only one approach and unlikely to be the best for most readers; from here on in it becomes more clearly an anthology of related pieces. Chalmers gives us a new version of Mary the Colour Scientist (no constraint about the old favourites in this part of the book) in Inverted Mary. When original Mary sees a tomato for the first time she discovers that it causes the phenomenal experience of redness: when inverted Mary sees a tomato (we must assume that it is the same one, not a less ripe version) she discovers that it causes the phenomenal experience of greenness. This and similar arguments have the alarming implication that the ineffability of qualia, of phenomenal experience, cannot be ring-fenced: it spills over at least into the intentionality of Mary’s knowledge and beliefs, and in fact evidently into a great deal of what we think, say and believe. This looks worrying, but on reflection I’m not sure it’s such big news as it seems; it’s inherent in the whole problem of qualia that when we both look at a tomato I have no way of being sure that what you experience – and refer to – as red is the same as the thing I’m talking about. More comfortingly Chalmers goes on to defend a certain variety of infallibility for direct phenomenal beliefs. Further chapters provide more evidence of Chalmers’ greater interest in intentionality: he reviews several forms of representationalism, the view that phenomenal experience has some ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1228 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1225-1228 Hankins, P. The Character of Consciousness intentional character (that is, it’s about or indicates something) and defends a narrow variety. He offers us a new version of the Garden of Eden, here pressed into service as a place where our experiences are direct and perfectly veridical. Chalmers uses the notion of Edenic content as a tool to break apart the constituents of experience; in fact, he seems eventually to convince himself that Edenic content is not only possible but fundamental, possibly the basis of perceptual experience. It’s an interesting idea. Included here too is a nice piece on the metaphysics of the Matrix (the film, that is). Chalmers entertainingly (and surely rightly) argues that the proposition that we are living in a matrix, a virtual reality world, is not sceptical, but metaphysical. It’s not, in fact, that we disbelieve in the world of the matrix, rather that we entertain some hypotheses about its ontological underpinnings. Even bits are things. The book rounds things off with an attempt (co-authored with Tim Bayne) to sort out some of the issues surrounding the unity of consciousness, distinguishing access and phenomenal unity along the lines of Ned Block’s distinction between access and phenomenal consciousness, and upholding the necessity of phenomenal unity at least. It’s a good, helpful book; what the content lacks in novelty it makes up in clarity. Chalmers has a persuasive style, and his expositions come across as moderate and sensible (perhaps the reduced epiphenomenalism helps a bit). It’s surprising that the denial of materialism (surely the dominant view of our time) can seem so common sense. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

399 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| April 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 3 | Page 399-399 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Joseph McCard Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Joseph McCard Gregory M. Nixon* I wish to thank McCard (2010) for his additional references that seem to give support to my major thesis: that the crossing of the symbolic threshold into language, myth, and complex culture changed us in a way that evolution could never have managed alone. Emergent self-consciousness created a new being that basically lives in a symbolic reality not entirely dependent on natural processes with aims that occasionally teeter into the decidedly unnatural. For good or ill, we are that being, the one who witnesses natural unfolding and our questionable effect upon it. References McCard, J. (2010) Brief comment on Gregory Nixon’s "Myth and Mind". Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 372-372. Nixon,G. M. (2010) Myth and mind: the origin of human consciousness in the discovery of the sacred. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 289-337. Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 481-481 Chief Editor, Corrections to Two Abstracts in JCER Vol. 1 Issue 3 481 Errata Corrections to Two Abstracts in JCER Vol.1 Issue 3 Chief Editor* ABSTRACT Due to the oversight of the Chief Editor of JCER, two Abstracts in JCER Volume 1 Issue 3 contain wordings which belong to two other authors in the same issue. JCER hereby apologizes to the authors so affected and publishes this errata to correct the mistakes so made. Key Words: errata. 1. The Abstract of author Syamala Hari online at http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/29 and in JCER Volume 1 Issue 3 at Page 352 should read: A brief summary of the concepts of God, divine Consciousness and human consciousness described in Indian philosophy is added here to dispel any misconceptions of this philosophy. 2. The Abstract of author Ram L. P. Vimal online at http://jcer.com/index.php/jcj/article/view/37 and in JCER Volume 1 Issue 3 at Page 383 should read: A general definition of consciousness that accommodates most views (Vimal, 2010b) is: “ ‘consciousness is a mental aspect of a system or a process, which is a conscious experience, a conscious function, or both depending on the context and particular bias (e.g. metaphysical assumptions)’, where experiences can be conscious experiences and/or nonconscious experiences and functions can be conscious functions and/or non-conscious functions that include qualities of objects. These are a posteriori definitions because they are based on observations and the categorization.” Non-conscious experiences are equivalent to relevant proto-experiences and non-conscious functions are equivalent to related proto-functions at various levels as these terms are precursors of respective conscious subjective experiences and conscious functions aspect of consciousness. The non-conscious experiences and non-conscious functions may be considered as a part of the definition of mind and/or awareness. Correspondence: Chief Editor, JCER. E-mail: editor@jcer.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

1238 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1238-1239 Smith, S. P. Review of John Watson’s Book: Schelling's Transcendental Idealism: A Critical Exposition Book Review Review of John Watson’s Book: Schelling's Transcendental Idealism: A Critical Exposition Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT Why do I review John Watson's 1882 classic, "Schelling's Transcendental Idealism"? I write this review in 2007, and the sad truth is that Schelling's system (with upgrades from Hegel, and others) is underappreciated in a world full of strife and dualistic thinking. It is underappreciated with some exceptions (e.g., Ken Wilber) even as Schelling's system could find its partial vindication coming from science. The buying public prefers its confusion coming from Richard Dawkins' "God Delusion." You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Schellings-Transcendental-Idealism-critical-exposition/dp/1402135688/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: Schelling’s system, transcendental idealism. John Watson does a wonderful job describing Kant and his aftermath, describing Fichte's thinking before moving on to Schelling. Watson follows the movements up to Hegel's entrance, but Watson writes mostly about Schelling's contributions. Watson (page 98) writes: "Even more strongly than Fichte, Schelling rejects as absurd and unthinkable any `objective' God, independent of man and nature, and seeks to explain each entirely from itself. " Schelling's God could not be held separate from God's creation. Watson establishes "the fundamental proposition of philosophy", and writes (page 109-110): It is not only the supreme condition of knowledge, but of action as well. Assuming, in the meantime, that a knowledge of objects is possible, and that volition also is possible, it is evident that both alike presuppose our fundamental principle. There can be no knowledge of anything apart from consciousness, and, as has been shown, no consciousness apart from the self-activity which we call self-consciousness; nor can there be any volition which is not in consciousness, and therefore none which is not made possible, and alone made possible, by self-consciousness." Schelling, we are told, develops his transcendental philosophy beyond Kant by recognizing two acts of intelligence: pure activity as volition and the limit of that activity presented as sensation. Watson (page 117) writes: "Sensation is not a mere limitation, but a consciousness of limitation, and such consciousness necessarily presupposes that there is, at the very least, a reaction of consciousness against that which is opposed to it." Watson (page 122) writes: "Perception is not the purely subjective apprehension of an independent object, but the actual apprehension of an object existing in relation to consciousness." Watson (page 180) writes: "The world is a divine poem, and history a drama in which Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 1239 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| December 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 9 | pp. 1238-1239 Smith, S. P. Review of John Watson’s Book: Schelling's Transcendental Idealism: A Critical Exposition individuals are not merely actors but authors; but it is one spirit which informs all and directs the confused play of individuality to a rational development." Unity in opposition is simple enough in principle, yet sometimes a sensation comes from reading Watson that a better articulation is possible (either from Watson or Schelling). This unfinished quality is apparently the nature of the beast; next to the infinite us finite folks are somewhat incomplete. It is better to admit our incompleteness and this is to discover our best art, even in the handiwork of an artist yet to be. Watson (page 194) writes: "Perhaps it is not unfair to say that no amount of self-restraint could ever have enabled Schelling, with his quick imaginative temperament, to build up such an edifice of philosophy as his great successor Hegel has left to us." It is worth noting that Hegel is not well understood today, but perhaps that will change. References John Watson, 2005, Review of John Watson’s Book: Schelling's Transcendental Idealism: A Critical Exposition, Adamant Media Corporation. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 402-409 Caponigro, M. & Vimal, R. L. P. Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind 402 Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind: an Epistemological Path and Objective Reduction of Thoughts ∗ Michele Caponigro Bergamo University, Epistemology of Complexity Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal † Vision Research Institute, 428 Great Road, Suite 11, Acton, MA 01720 USA This brief paper argues about a possible quantum interpretation of Vedic Theory of Mind. Chitta, Manas, Buddhi and Ahamkara, in our quantum approach will be considered respectively as: common ground, quantum superpositions, observer (quantum collapsing) and measurement outcomes eingvalues,Povm. We suggest that through the continue interactions between these four components, we are able to understand the formation of Ahamkara (Ego). Chitta (by vrittis) is linked to Manas via entanglement. The unsolved problem is the nature of Buddhi component and his right collocation in this process. Moreover, we argue that our approach can be supported by Zeilinger’s interpretations of quantum mechanics. Finally, we will speculate about possible analogy between Chitta and Bohm’s Holomovement. Keywords: Vedic theory of Mind, quantum superposition, Zeilinger interpretation, Chitta, Holomovement I. INTRODUCTION The Samkhya is the oldest school of Hindu Philosophy, for it is the first attempt to harmonize the philosophy of the Vedas through reason. The Samkhya teaches that the phenomenal universe is considered as a dynamic order, an eternal process of unfolding/enfolding, without beginning or end. All has evolved out of an Uncaused cause which is not consistent with a rational solution. The Samkhya leaves the Uncaused cause undefined as being impossible to be conceived by the intellect. This absolute is beyond time, space and thought, it is without difference, attribute and form. True evolution, according to Samkhya system, does not exist in the phenomenal world, but only in the chain of causation from the cosmic substance (prakrti) to the gross elements (mahabhutas). According Kak’s[1] work the Sankhya and the Yoga systems take the mind as consisting of five components: 1 Chitta 2 Manas 3 Buddhi 4 Ahamkara 5 *Paramatman →Atman→Purush↔ Prakriti→Brahma→ Jivatman Manas is the lower mind which collects sense impressions. Ahankara (the individual Ego, which feels itself to be a distinct, separate entity) is the sense of I-ness that associates some perceptions to a subjective and personal ∗ Electronic address: michele.caponigro@unibg.it Electronic address: rlpvimal@yahoo.co.in † ISSN: 2153-8212 experience. Once sensory impressions have been related to I-ness by ahamkara, their evaluation and resulting decisions are arrived at by buddhi, the intellect. Chitta is the memory bank of the mind. These memories constitute the foundation on which the rest of the mind operates. But chitta is not merely a passive instrument. The organization of the new impressions throws up instinctual or primitive urges which creates different emotional states. This mental complex surrounds the innermost aspect of consciousness, which is called atman, the self, or Brahman. In our approach, we will analyze first four entities in detail. The set of entities in fifth component of mind is beyond the scope of current article. However, concisely, our hypothesis is that entities Paramatman is assimilable with the Bohm’s Implicate Order [2]. This is because this entity is in enfolded form and is the fundamental sub-quantum dual-aspect unified field; it pervades all Atmans and Prakriti. In the fifth component (Paramatman→Atman→ Purush↔Prakriti→Brahma→ Jivatman), the arrow → indicates that the entity on its right side is ’derivable’ from that on its left side and ↔ refers to bi-directional interaction. Furthermore, Paramatman is ’quantized’ in to Atmans, each of which pervades Prakriti. The entity Atman when it is in excited state with energy is called Purush, which when interacts with un-manifested (unevolved) Prakriti (vacuum) is called Brahma, which, in turn is when embodied (after co-evolution and codevelopment) in an individual, is called Jivatman [3]. However, this type of successive stepby-step derivation seems to be metaphysical-view dependent and appears to be designed for ’dualism from eastern perspective’ (Dvait Vedanta) and/or neutral monism (Advaita Vedanta). To make Vedic theory of mind (VTOM) ’independent of’ or ’not committed to’ any metaphysical-view, we might need a minor modification as follows: (Paramatman→ParamPurush/MahaPurush Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 402-409 Caponigro, M. & Vimal, R. L. P. Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind ↔Prakriti→ParamBrahma→Atman/Jivatman)). In other words, one can investigate if such modification will allow VTOM to be applicable to all views including materialism. For example, in the case of materialism, we have implicitly assumed that ’Paramatman → Param-Purush/MahaPurush’ plays a role of say perturbation in Prakriti in string theory, which is then eventually capable of creating SEs including self (Atman/Jivatman) in humans and animals. In such modification, Paramatman when it is in excited state with energy can be called ParamPurush or MahaPurush, which when interacts with un-manifested (un-evolved) Prakriti (vacuum) is called ParamBrahma. Then, long after Big Bang or Big Bounce (perhaps during Cambrian evolutionary explosion about 540 millions years ago [4,5] the mental aspect of 1 ParamBrahma is ’quantized’ in to Atmans (also called Jivatmans) by the process of co-evolution, codevelopment, sensori-motor tuning, and embodiment in an individual. Jivatman is also called self or subjective experience of subject [6]. Unfolding or Explicate Order starts when MahaPurush/Purush and Prakriti interact with each other (or ’Prakriti is infused/joined with Purush’) and ParamBrahma/Brahma starts ’creation’ at the onset of classical Big Bang or quantum Big bounce; for further detail see [7]. Eventually, after a long period of co-evolution and co-development, Brahma is embodied in an individual subject, which is then called Jivatman. The embodied entity Jivatman interacts with entities Chitta, Manas, Buddhi, and Ahamkara (the topic of current article). Furthermore, in previous article [29], the empirical data of samadhi state was interpreted in terms of various metaphysical views and science, especially with respect to the dualaspect dual-mode optimal framework. In addition, it was argued that there is a need for a new Veda in Vedic science (perhaps, it can be called ”Vigyan Veda”), which is close to science (=Vigyan), such as neuroscience and quantum physics. The Vigyan Veda tries to remove ”the inconsistencies and speculative hypotheses related to consciousness research from Vedic science that includes ancient four Vedas (Rigveda, Yajurveda, Samaveda, and Atharvaveda) ” [29]. In [31] subjective experiences (SEs) are derived from a protoexperience and three gunas (qualities: Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas guna) of Vedic science in the dual-aspect-dualmode framework with hypothesis H2 [13]. The current article can be considered another chapter of Vigyan Veda. 403 FIG.1: Table of correspondences (see DetailsPag.8,Fig.5) FIG. 2: Our pathway II. OUR PATHWAY 1. Here, the term ’quantized’ is used metaphorically and needs unpacking because it could be different from say the ’quantization’ of materialistic classical electromagnetic field in to quantum electrodynamics to change the description of a physical system from classical to quantum-mechanical. ISSN: 2153-8212 In order to support our main thesis, we have drawn two pictures. On the basis of the tables 1 and 2 (see respectively Fig.1 and Fig 5, pag.8), we have drawn FIG 2. As we see, the role of Chitta is fundamental, it is the common ground. We suggest that Chitta is linked Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 402-409 Caponigro, M. & Vimal, R. L. P. Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind via entanglement with Manas. Manas is represented by quantum superpositions of phase-entangled thoughtwaves arising from Chitta. According to this view, the Ahamkara is built time by time through Buddhi’s choices (i.e., collapse). According to [8], ”Notice how the stream of thoughts, [emotions, images, and impressions] comes from somewhere, and then recedes back into that same place. This place is Chitta. [...] Ahamkara is the sense of ”I-am-ness,” the individual Ego, which feels itself to be a distinct, separate entity. It provides identity to our functioning, but Ahamkara also creates our feelings of separation, pain, and alienation as well.Ahamkara is the strong wave that declares ”I am”.” Ego can have negative energy (such as in aversion) or positive energy (such 2 as Sankalp shakti or energy of determination) [8], . Concisely, Chitta is continuously emitting Vrittis (are thought waves in vedic tradition) towards Manas who acts on them. This process leads to the superposition of phase-entangled thought-waves and subjective experiences (SEs) embedded in neuralnetworks via developmental neural Darwinism and sensorimotor interaction and tuning[5, 9–13] as Manas. To sum up, we have: 1 2 3 4 Chitta (the ground) Vrittis arise from Chitta (via entanglement) Manas act on them by Buddhi’s choice (collapse) Ahamkara is built as quantum measurement outcomes. The Waves of vrittis (that arise from Chitta) is an information from outer world, we will see that this information is the same concept utilized in Zeilinger’s interpretation of quantum mechanics. In the last section, we will see that the ground (Chitta) is assimilable to Bohm’s Holomovement which has no space-time structure (our previous work). III. QUANTUM SUPERPOSITION OF THOUGHT WAVES AND SE(S) AS MANAS. As we know, in the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics, the essential difference of quantum mechanical concept of reality from usual classical reality is that in quantum mechanics the properties of material systems, as they are observed in a measurement, may not exist before the observation (measurement process). In the context of Vedic theory 3 of Mind means that without Buddhi component Chitta is not perceived. We show a simple example of quantum superposition. To see how this plays out in real physics, consider the quantum superposition: ψ = ∑ ciϕ i i in case of simple quantum superposition of two eigenstates ϕ1, ϕ2, we find the following state of the particle before the measurement: ψ = c1ϕ1 + c2ϕ2, this superposition of states is localized correspondingly in in A1 and A2. According to reduction postulate the system having been previously in the state ψ goes over into one of the states ψ1 and ψ2, with the 2 2 corresponding probabilities |c1| and |c2| . Thus, before the measurement we do not know where this particle is located; it could be at A1, A2, or both. This postulate corresponds to what is observed in real measurements, the reduction postulate is accepted as the basis for the quantum-mechanical calculations. In our approach, the Ahamkara component of Vedic theory of Mind is represented by eigenvalues (or 4 Povm) . For example, ’I experience redness of redrose’. IV. ZEILINGER’S INTERPRETATION OF QUANTUM MECHANICS: REALITY AS INFORMATION Recently, with the development of quantum information theory, several scientists have given to the information a fundamental role in the description of the Nature. Quantum information theory has led to new way to look at the foundations of QM, including a greater emphasis on possible role of subjective probability [15] in QM. Several works claims that the quantum mechanics can be viewed as an information theory. These works states that the description of physical systems in terms of information and information processing, is the only way to describe physical system. For instance, according Bub’s words [16]: I argue that quantum mechanics is fundamentally a theory about the representation and manipulation of information, not a theory about the mechanics of nonclassical waves or particles. The notion of quantum information is to be understood as a new physical primitive. 2 According to [9] ”Nature provides seven groups of self-protective energies (rakshaseeya saktiyan: RS) to protect an individual system: desire (kama), anger (krodha), ego (mada), greed (lobha), attachment (moha), jealousy (eershya), and selfish-love (swarthmay prem). Each of these has both positive and negative aspects. Positive aspects are useful and lead to individual progress, whereas negative aspect lead to suffering and war when two or more people interact as in a family, a society, a nation, or a world. Negative aspects must be sublimated (converted) into compassion, humility, and love to minimize suffering and war and to maximize happiness and peace.” Thus, one could argue that Ahamkara can be unpacked in to 7 RS. ISSN: 2153-8212 404 3 In this article, the term ’theory of Mind’ includes theories of ’my own mind’ and ’others mind’. 4 POVM = Positive Operator Valued Measure: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POVM Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 402-409 Caponigro, M. & Vimal, R. L. P. Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind 405 6 Concisely, the information is taken at ontic level. We are interested to illustrate Zeilinger’s position as an evidence. His thesis is quite simple [17]: ”The discovery that individual events are irreducibly random is probably one of the most significant findings of the twentieth century, even for single particles, it is not always possible to assign definite measurement outcomes independently of and prior to the selection of specific measurement apparatus in the specific experiment. For this reason, the distinction between reality and our knowledge of reality, between reality and information, cannot be made”. All these approaches (called quantum theoretic description of physical systems) start in general from the assumption that we live in a world in which there are certain constraints on the acquisition, representation, and communication of information. According these approaches, the description of physical systems in terms of information and information processing, is complementary (or the only way) to the conventional description of physical system in terms of the laws of physics. The notion of quantum information is to be understood as a new physical primitive. The primitive role of the information seems to explain, according some authors, the deep nature of physical reality. In this framework, the description of a quantum state is a description of the information possessed by the observer about the system.) According to Zeilinger and Brukner [17] the 5 information is the most fundamental notion in quantum mechanics. Based on this observation they suggest new ideas for a foundational principle for quantum theory. They proposed, that the foundational principle for quantum theory may be identified through the assumption that the most elementary system carries one bit of information only. Therefore an elementary system can only give a definite answer in one specific measurement. The irreducible randomness of individual outcomes in other measurements and quantum complementarity are then necessary consequences. Moreover, they affirm that the objective randomness of the individual quantum event is a necessity of a description of the world in view of the significant influence the observer in quantum mechanics has. In other words, the quantum level can be considered as subjective because of observer’s choice. Starting from these premises the Buddhi component assumes 5 According to [14] and [5, 10–13], information can have dualaspect: mental and material. ISSN: 2153-8212 the role of observer, his choice causes the collapse, thus causes Ahamkara. Moreover, we suggest that Zeilinger’s interpretation give us only an apparent randomness of measurement outcomes but only in the explicate order. V. THE CENTRAL ROLE OF BUDDHI COMPONENT The central role of Buddhi, is supported by Zeilinger’s interpretation of quantum mechanics. The Buddhi component by his continue choices is able to build time by time the Ahamkara. In general, the five components of mind, namely, (i) Chitta, (ii) Manas, (iii) Buddhi, (iv) Ahamkara, and (v)Paramatman→Atman→Purush ↔Prakriti→Brahma→ Jivatman or Paramatman→ ParamPurush/MahaPurush↔Prakriti → ParamBrahma→ Atman/Jivatman’ are not well defined in literature including Rig-Veda, and have overlapping meanings/attributes; and various Vedic scholars use these terms and their interactions differently. For example, see [8]. Chitta, Manas, Buddhi, and Ahamkara are not fundamental entities and lack inherent existence. Therefore, according to Nagarjuna, there is no causation (Buddhi does not cause Ahamkara and vice-versa) and they dependently co-arise [18–20], which is consistent with re-entry hypothesis [11, 22, 23]. In other words, they all interact with each other in re-entrant manner for having subjective experiences, thoughts, perception, and action. The Vedic theory of mind (VTOM) that includes yoga is an elegant framework because it appears to be independent of various metaphysical views. This means VTOM can be interpreted in terms of idealism (matter emerges from mind), dual-aspect (mind and matter are two aspects of the same entity), neutralmonism (∼Advait Vedanta, mind and matter are derived from or reduced to a neutral entity), (substance) dualism (∼Dvait Vedanta: mind and matter are on equal footing and independent of each other but interact with each other via a liaison[21, 24] perhaps via Manas), and materialism (mind emerges from matter). For example, the Fig. 3 shows one of the interpretations of Vedic theory of Mind: Ahamkara seems to acts as an efficient condition for Buddhi, but other conditions 7 might be involved . On the other hand, Fig. 4a shows 6 How the ’choice’ or ’selection’ is precisely and rigorously made is given in [10] using the dual-aspect-dual-mode optimal framework. 7 ”From an eastern perspective, Nagarjuna argued that the real causes should have powers as their essential properties and should have inherent existence, but causality does not have these attributes. Therefore, he proposes four ’conditions’ (efficient, percept-object, immediate, and dominant conditions) instead of causality to explain phenomena in conventional reality: (i) an efficient condition explains the occurrence of successive events; (ii) an object is the percept-object condition for its perception; (iii) an immediate condition explains the various steps involved Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 402-409 Caponigro, M. & Vimal, R. L. P. Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind 406 FIG. 3: The secondary role of Buddhi component. FIG. 4: a) The central role of Buddhi: the ego is built through a Buddhi’s choice, b) ”Collapsed, therefore, I am” VI. CHITTA AS HOLOMOVEMENT another interpretation: Buddhi seems to acts as an efficient condition for Ahamkara. One (such as Descartes) could be tempted to interpret Fig. 3 ”I am, therefore I think”, where the term ”I am” refers to Ahamkara and the term ’I think’ refers to Buddhi. On the other hand, Fig. 4b can be interpreted as ”I think, therefore I am” (reverse of Descartes’ aphorism). There, we emphasize that one should observe caution in the interpretations of VTOM. For example, both interpretations can be derived from this elegant Vedic theory of Mind and Nagarjuna’s dependent co8 origination . Furthermore, in the above example, one could argue that ’I’ or ’true Self’ is Jivatman, ’I-maker’ or the ’false self’ is Ahamkara [8], and ’thinker’/’decision maker’ is Buddhi. One could further argue that the term ’Self’ can be referred to Atman[8]/ Purusha/ Brahman/Jivatman depending on the specific context and the framework. One could also argue that all entities (Chitta, Manas, Buddhi, Ahamkara, and Jivatman) interact in re-entrant manner in a neuralnetwork for SEs, thoughts, perception, and action. Further research is needed to make them precise and to link VTOM with the current trend of neuroscience. in a phenomena; (iv) a dominant condition is the purpose for which an action is undertaken”.[20] 8 Historically, Vedic science was opposed by atheists Buddhism (Nagarjuna was Buddhist philosopher), Jainism, and materialists Lokˆayata (or Cˆarvˆaka: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lokayata). ISSN: 2153-8212 The starting point according Bohm [2] is the understanding of the universe as an unbroken, undivided whole. Every attempt to analyze the whole by breaking it into seemingly independent parts is in principle incomplete and in the last consequence and is doomed to fail. Bohm very strongly points out that everything or, better, the whole is in constant motion, is evolving, and that nothing ever is fixed or reaches an ultimate, final form. Some of the notions and phrases underlying the processuality in his thinking are undivided wholeness in flowing movement or holomovement, the enfoldingunfolding universe; he also stresses that knowledge should be considered as a process”. In details, the holomovement is a dynamics holistic pulsation in which orders unfold and enfold. This fundamental process is not a movement within space-time but rather a process in which ultimately space-time and its contents are created. The following quotation put in evidence the dynamics of space-time creation [30]: ”One important feature concerning the holomovement is that it is not described in space-time but from it space-time is to be abstracted. Thus we no longer start with an a priori space-time manifold in order to discuss physics; rather we construct spacetime from the underlying process. Is not, as Wheeler and Hawking suggests, a progression for the continuum via fluctuations to the Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 402-409 Caponigro, M. & Vimal, R. L. P. Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind space-time foam: rather it is the simplicial description of the relative invariant features of the holomovement that become the foam from which the continuous space-time is abstracted. Thus locality is no longer a primary concept but is also abstracted so that quantum non-local correlations could be explained as remnant of the basic All five entities Chitta, Manas, Buddhi, Ahamkara, and ’Paramatman →Atman→Purush↔Prakriti →Brahma Jivatman→ or ‘Paramatman’→ParamPurush/ MahaPurush→Prakriti→ParamBrahma→Atman/ ‘Jivatman’ are assimilable with Bohm’s Implicate and Explicate order at various levels and the holomovement framework [2]. For example, the entities Paramatman→Atman→ Purush↔Prakriti can be considered equivalent to Bohm’s enfolded Implicate Order, whereas Brahma, Jivatman, Chitta, Manas, Buddhi, and Ahamkara can be considered as unfolded Explicate Order at various levels. For example, Chitta is assimilable with the holomovement that does not have the structure of space-time; the holomovement (via entanglement) unfolds and enfolds via space-time; in the same way Chitta unfolds and enfolds (via entanglement) with Manas, which represent the Explicate Order of Vedic theory of Mind. VII. CONCLUSION To sum up, at sub-quantum fundamental level, both Vedic theory of mind and Bohm’s Implicate/Explicate Order can be interpreted as similar. One could argue that the latter might be derived from the former to the some extent. Both are elegant frameworks because they can be interpreted as independent of metaphysical views, even though Bohm was clearly dual-aspect philosopher [10] and a great physicist. Furthermore, at quantum and classical level, Vedic theory of mind can be interpreted in terms of global workspace framework [25], neural Darwinism and reentrant processing [11, 22, 23], and of course the dualaspect dual-mode framework [5, 9–13]. One could argue that it would be the difficult to fit contemporary materialistic reductionistic neuroscience framework with non-reductionistic wholeness. However, the boundary between both frameworks might melt as consciousness and neuroscience researches progress, say, by extending materialism to physicalism (= materialism + SEs) via [1] Kak S; Indian Physics: Outline of Early History, arXiv:physics/0310001v1. See also http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/tes/teskakshistoryframeset.htm [2] Bohm, D. (1980) Wholeness and the Implicate Order (London,Routledge Kegan Paul) ISSN: 2153-8212 407 dual-aspect dual-mode framework. VIII. COMMENTARIES According to Chandrasekar (personal communication in June 2010), ”I find that your article on vedic theory of mind uses different understanding from Samkhya, Yoga, Buddhism and Advaita. I personally feel that this way of taking different standpoints is tricky and troublesome. For example, Samkhya talks only of Purusha and Prakrti (note: it does not talk of parabrahman). Advaita talks of Atman and Brahman. Buddhism denies permanence of soul. Hence I say that a combination of the understanding of these four philosophical schools might be tricky. Regarding Descartes I think therefor I am. Please be informed of the Existentialist, Soren Kierkegaard, who philosophized in the way you have projected this statement as I am therefore I think (Kierkegaard also refutes Descartes position with this statement to establish his existentialist position.” Response: We agree with Chandrasekar that there are differences between Samkhya, Yoga, Buddhism and Advaita and each of them has problems. Therefore, we follow the dual-aspect-dual-mode PE-SE framework[5, 10] that is optimal (which has the least number of problems) and is close to Trika-Kashmir-Shaivism, where Shiva is the mental aspect and Shakti is the physical aspect of the same entity[31]. A. Acknowledgments RLPV was partly supported by VP-Research Foundation Trust and Vision Research Institute research Fund. Authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers for their critical comments, suggestions, and grammatical corrections and Arya Putra for personal communication. RLPV is also affiliated with Dristi Anusandhana Sansthana, A-60 Umed Park, Sola Road, Ahmedabad-61, Gujrat, India; Dristi Anusandhana Sansthana, c/o NiceTech Computer Education Institute, Pendra, Bilaspur, C.G. 495119, India; and Dristi Anusandhana Sansthana, Sai Niwas, East of Hanuman Mandir, Betiahata, Gorakhpur, U.P. 273001 India. [3] Arya-Putra. (2009). Beyond Religion: Wisdom Publishers Organization [4] Hameroff, S. (1998). Did Consciousness Cause the Cambrian Evolutionary Explosion? In S. R. Hameroff A. W. Kaszniak A. C. Scott (Eds.), Toward a Science of Consciousness II: The Second Tucson Discussions and Debates (pp.421-437) Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 402-409 Caponigro, M. & Vimal, R. L. P. Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/ penrosehameroff/cambrian.html. [5] Vimal, R. L. P. (2008). Proto-experiences and Subjective Experiences: Classical and Quantum Concepts. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 7(1), 49-73. [6] Bruzzo, A. A., Vimal, R. L. P. (2007). Self: An adaptive pressure arising from self-organization, chaotic dynamics, and neural Darwinism. Journal of Integrative Neuro-science, 6(4), 541-566. [7] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009i). Towards a Theory of Everything: Unification of Consciousness with Fundamental Forces in Theories of Physics. Vision Research Institute: Living Vision and Consciousness Research, 1(2), Available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/VimalTOE-LVCR2009-I.pdf. [8] Bharati, S. J. (2009). Coordinating the Four Functions of Mind. Available: http://www.swamij.com/fourfunctionsmind.htm (2009, October, 20) [9] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009b). Dual Aspect Framework for Consciousness and Its Implications: West meets East for Sublimation Process. In G. Derfer Z. Wang M. Weber (Eds.), The Roar of Awakening. A Whiteheadian Dialogue Between Western Psychotherapies and Eastern Worldviews. (Vol. 3 of Whitehead Psychology Nexus Studies, pp. 39-70. Longer and corrected version is available:http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/ Consciousness-and-its-implications-recent-version.pdf Frankfurt / Lancaster: Ontos Verlag [10] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009d). Matching and selection of a specific subjective experience: conjugate matching and subjective experience. In press: Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 8(3), Longer version is available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/Selectionmatching-Vimal-LVCR-2009-XII.pdf. [11] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009f). Necessary Ingredients of Consciousness: Integration of Psychophysical, Neurophysiological, and Consciousness Research for the RedGreen Channel. Vision Research Institute: Living Vision and Consciousness Research, 1(1), Available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/VimalNecessaryIngredients-Conciousness-LVCR-2009-II.pdf. [12] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009g). Subjective Experience Aspect of Consciousness Part I -Integration of Classical, Quantum, and Subquantum Concepts. NeuroQuantology, 7(3), 390-410. Available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/PESESQ-Vimal-LVCR-2009-III.pdf. [13] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009h). Subjective Experience Aspect of Consciousness Part II: Integration of Classical and Quantum Concepts for Emergence Hypothesis. NeuroQuantology, 7(3), 411-434. Available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/PE-SEEmergence-Vimal-LVCR-2009-IV.pdf. [14] Chalmers, D. J. (2003). Consciousness and its Place in Nature. In S. Stich F. Warfield (Eds.), Blackwell Guide to Philosophy of Mind: Blackwell. Also in (D. Chalmers, ed) Consciousness and its Place in Nature (Oxford University Press, 2002) [15] Fuchs, C. Quantum Mechanics as Quantum Information (and only a little more); arXiv:quant-ph/0205039v1 (2002) 408 [17] Brukner C, Zukowski M, Zeilinger A, The essence of entanglement. arXiv:quant-ph/0106119 2001 [18] Caponigro, M., Prakash, R. (2009). Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics and Emptiness. NeuroQuantology, 7(2), 198-203. Available:http://www.neuroquantology.com/ journal/index.php/nq/index. [19] Nagarjuna, Garfield, J. L. (1995). The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nagarjuna’s Mulamadhyamakakarika (J. L. Garfield, Trans.). New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press (Translation and commentary by J. L. Garfield). [20] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009a). Dependent Co-origination and Inherent Existence: Dual-Aspect Framework. Vision Research Institute: Living Vision and Consciousness Research, 1(2), Available: http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/Coorigination-VimalLVCR-2009-III.pdf. [21] Eccles, J. C. (1992). Evolution of consciousness. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 89(16), 7320-7324. [22] Edelman, G. M. (1993). Neural Darwinism: selection and reentrant signaling in higher brain function. Neuron, 10(2), 115-125. [23] Hamker, F. H. (2005). The Reentry Hypothesis: The Putative Interaction of the Frontal Eye Field, Ventrolateral Prefrontal Cortex, and Areas V4, IT for Attention and Eye Movement. Cereb Cortex., 15(4), 431-447. [24] Beck, F., Eccles, J. (1992). Quantum aspects of brain activity and the role of consciousness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 89, 1135711361. [25] Baars, B. J. (1997). In the Theater of Consciousness: The Workspace of the Mind: Oxford University Press. [26] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009e). Meanings attributed to the term ’consciousness’: an overview. Journal of Consciousness Studies: Special Issue on Defining consciousness (Ed. Chris Nunn), 16(5), 9-27. See also http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/ Home/meaningsVimal.pdf. [27] Rao, K. R. (1998). TWO FACES OF CONSCIOUSNESS: A Look at Eastern and Western Perspectives. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 5(3), 309-327. [28] Rao, K. R. (2005). Perception, Cognition and Consciousness in Classical Hindu Psychology. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 12(3), 3-30. [29] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009c). Interpretation of Empirical Data of Samadhi State and the Dual-Aspect Dual-Mode Optimal Framework. Vision Research Institute: Living Vision and Consciousness Research, 2(3), Available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/ Vimal-SamadhiLVCR-2009-III.I.pdf. [30] Hiley, B.J. Peat, F.D. (Eds) (1987) Quantum Implications (London, Routledge Kegan Paul). [31] Vimal, R. L. P. (2009a). Derivation of Subjective Experiences from a Proto-experience and three Gunas in the Dual-Aspect-Dual-Mode Framework. Vision Research Institute: Living Vision and Consciousness Research, 2(4), Available at http://sites.google.com/site/rlpvimal/Home/2009Vimal-Guna-LVCR-II(iv)-I.pdf [16] Bub J., Quantum mechanics is about quantum information,Foundations of Physics, Festschrift issue (2004) ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 402-409 Caponigro, M. & Vimal, R. L. P. Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind 409 FIG. 5: Table of correspondences in details: (1)See also[10] for Bohm’s Implicate/Explicate order and holomovement. (2)There are many meanings (or aspects) attributed to the term ’consciousness’, such as ’pure consciousness’, ’subjective experiences’, (multidimensional) physical/neurobiological processes, and so on. Further details are given in[26]. See also[27, 28]. For the interpretation of empirical data of samadhi state, see[29]. (3)”Unus mundus, lit. ”One world”, is a term which refers to the concept of an underlying unified reality from which everything emerges and returns to” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unus.mundus). . ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 471-473 Smith, S. P. Review of Douglas R. Hofstadter's Book: I Am a Strange Loop 471 Book Review Review of Douglas R. Hofstadter's Book: I Am a Strange Loop Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT There is little science to be found in Hofstadter's analogical arguments. His book is mostly weak philosophy. He (page xvii) writes: "Although I hope to reach philosophers with this book's ideas, I don't think I write much like a philosopher". Then he writes (page 325): "Philosophers who believe that consciousness comes from something over and above physical law are dualists, etc., etc." Physical laws are found necessary, but Hofstadter's own strange loop implies that laws in isolation are insufficient to explain consciousness. There is only a leap of faith! Moreover, it is caricature mode thinking that is found dualistic. The strange loop can be better advanced by bringing it in line with philosophy, and in particular, the philosophies of C.S. Peirce and Edmund Husserl. It is the Trinitarian logic offered by Hegel that is non-dual, and it is Brouwer's intuitionist mathematics that is non-dual. You can find this book at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/Am-Strange-Loop-DouglasHofstadter/dp/0465030785/ref=cm_cr-mr-title . Key Words: strange loop, consciousness, self-reference. Caricature-mode thinking is an abstract flow of symbolism that Hofstadter relates to selfness. Hofstadter (page 84) writes on the concepts that find themselves triggered while standing at the grocery store checkout: "grocery cart", "line", "customers", "to wait", "candy rack", "candy bar", "tabloid", "newspaper", "movie stars", "trashy headline", etc. Even dogs can hold such symbolism sets, Hofstadter (page 81) writes: "my paw", "my tail", "my food", "my water", "my dish", "indoors", "outdoors", "dog door", "human door", etc. And the richer the symbolism set the bigger the "soul", with humans having bigger souls than dogs, mosquito selves hardly measure up. Caricature-mode thought involves an abstract symbolism set that is found self triggering, Hofstadter (page 91) writes: "all of this more abstract stuff is rooted in the constant reinforcement, moment by moment, of symbols that are haphazardly triggered out of dormancy by events in the world that we perceive first-hand. These immediate metal events constitute the bedrock underlying our broader sense of reality." Coming with caricature-mode thinking is the function of analogical reasoning. Hofstadter's book is one such analogical argument followed by another, a check on the word "analogies" found in the index is very revealing. Hofstadter (page xv) writes: "And one of my firmest conclusions is that we always think by seeking and drawing parallels to things we know from our past, and that we therefore communicate best when we exploit examples, analogies, and metaphors galore, when we avoid abstract generalities, when we use very down-to-earth, concrete, and simple language, and when we talk directly about our own experiences." The problem comes that analogies provide only the leap of faith leaving the deeper realization of meaning and truth undeclared. When does the leap of faith become the leap of empathy? Caricature-mode thinking leaves this question unanswered, rather analogical reasoning becomes a proxy for "pulling the wool over our eyes" as this mode of thinking avoids the key issue. Hofstadter's analogies disappoint, leaving selfness undefined. Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, Physics Department, University Of California at Davis, CA E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 471-473 Smith, S. P. Review of Douglas R. Hofstadter's Book: I Am a Strange Loop 472 The weakness of analogical reasoning has led Hofstadter to insist that the strange loop is defined by the collection of abstract symbols that have found themselves in a circuit. Hofstadter prefers the abstract formalism of mathematical symbolism in isolation, even for example the symbolism found in Whitehead and Russell's "Principia Mathematica" (PM). To his credit Hofstadter notes that the PM formalism is unable to remove itself from loopiness. However, Hofstadter forgets that Gödel is also unable to be removed from the symbolism that turned the formalism into a self referential loop. Gödel as caricature is not Gödel as person (otherwise big mistake), and this revelation defeats Hofstadter's thesis. No doubt, Hofstadter prefers the formalistic mathematics of David Hilbert to the intuitionist mathematic of L. E. J. Brouwer. With intuitionist mathematics the creating subject cannot be turned into caricature presented as language, and this view brings a completely different interpretation to the strange loop. The strange loop as a collection of caricatures is not sufficient to explain consciousness, it is only that the strange loop is found as a necessary condition given that reality is rich enough to contain a creating subject. Hofstadter got it backward, and fooled himself with analogical arguments. The strange loop and its caricatures support a full awareness, it is not that the strange loop defines consciousness from mere caricatures. Analogical reasoning has led Hofstadter to declare that selfness is an illusion or an epiphenomenon; beyond caricature-mode thinking there is no personhood. If something cannot be proven by the lower level system (inside a strange loop), somehow this is enough for Hofstadter to leap to the conclusion that the upper level self is an illusion. But this does not follow, and Hofstadter admits to downward causality in Chapter 12. Moreover, for something to be an illusion, there must be some self that is fooled, and a foolish self is still real despite Hofstadter's analogical arguments. Hofstadter got it backward! What is the illusion is only the caricature-mode person, but this is only the ego self that is found attached to caricature. Hofstadter (Chapters 15 and 16) makes a very strong case for person-to-person sharing inside one brain, even if one person has departed and comes to us in dreams. Certainly if selfness is an epiphenomenon then there is little difficulty in conceiving of life after death, as illusion has no limit. And because truth is defined by analogy then there is life after death found in Hofstadter's strange loop. However, a much stronger case can be made for person-to-person sharing by expanding the strange-loop beyond caricature mode thinking; for example, by including Husserl's transcendental and inter-subjective self. Hofstandter will have you believe that caricatures and analogical arguments form a complete system; and that this abstract system is enough for our feelings to emerge being that feelings are themselves more caricatures. Hofstandter (page 201) writes on how the mind works: "by the compounding of old ideas into new structures that become new ideas that can themselves be used in compounds, and round and round endlessly, growing even more remote from the basic earthbound imagery that is each language's soil." Caricature mode thinking is in fact an example of dualism that Hofstander struggles with in Chapter 22. In the Epilogue, Hofstandter seeks the non-dual but the only way he can find it is to detach from the egocentric symbolism that depicts the strange loop. It is caricature mode thinking that must be partially abandoned! Otherwise, mere analogy will never find its leap of empathy. There is little science to be found in Hofstadter's analogical arguments. His book is mostly weak philosophy. He (page xvii) writes: "Although I hope to reach philosophers with this book's ideas, I don't think I write much like a philosopher". Then he writes (page 325): "Philosophers who believe that consciousness comes from something over and above physical law are dualists, etc., etc." Physical laws are found necessary, but Hofstadter's own strange loop implies that laws in isolation are insufficient to explain consciousness. There is only a leap of faith! Moreover, it is caricature mode thinking that is found dualistic. The strange loop can be better advanced by bringing it in line with ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 471-473 Smith, S. P. Review of Douglas R. Hofstadter's Book: I Am a Strange Loop 473 philosophy, and in particular, the philosophies of C.S. Peirce and Edmund Husserl. It is the Trinitarian logic offered by Hegel that is non-dual, and it is Brouwer's intuitionist mathematics that is non-dual. Hofstadter's "I Am a Strange Loop" is very interesting (3 stars worth), but it needs work. Hofstadter can profit from reading Whitehead's "Process and Reality," where we find even Whitehead moving beyond PM, and moving beyond self as caricature. References Douglas R. Hofstadter, 2007, I Am a Strnage Loop, Basic Books. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

14 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Article The Central Enigma of Consciousness Chris King* ABSTRACT The nature and physical basis of consciousness remains the central enigma of the scientific description of reality in the third millennium. This paper seeks to examine the phenomenal nature of consciousness and elucidate a possible biophysical basis for its existence, in terms of a form of quantum anticipation based on entangled states driven by chaotic sensitivity of global brain states during decision-making processes. Key Words: consciousness, central enigma, reality, biophysical basis, quantum anticipation, entangled state, chaotic sensitivity, global brain state, decision-making process. 1. The Enigmatic Theatre of Conscious Experience The term consciousness itself is enigmatic. Both „mind‟ and „consciousness‟ present a varied array of associated words and concepts, which we need to clarify, to even begin to close in on the central enigma, which the terms present to us. Mind conjures up a plethora of concepts from minding i.e. emotional caring, or objecting, through the rational mind of thought and language based reasoning, mindfulness or focused concentration, to absent-, clear- or small- mindedness to the mindless blunders many of us consciously make, despite ourselves. Consciousness can mean everything from the root capacity to have subjective experiences at all, through awake alertness, as opposed to the slumber, or coma, of unconsciousness, through the fuzzy boundary between subconscious or unconscious processing that accompanies conscious cognition, to the restrictive idea of selfconsciousness, as knowing that you know - “a conscious state is one which has a higher-order accompanying thought which is about the state in question” i. Wikipedia ii, iii has the following introductory descriptions, chosen because they are a product of a social process of consensual agreement as to their meaning and content: “Mind collectively refers to the aspects of intellect and consciousness manifested as combinations of thought, perception, memory, emotion, will and imagination; mind is the stream of consciousness. It includes all of the brain's conscious processes. This denotation sometimes includes, in certain contexts, the working of the human unconscious or the conscious thoughts of animals. "Mind" is often used to refer especially to the thought processes of reason.” “Consciousness has been defined loosely as a constellation of attributes of mind such as subjectivity, self-awareness, sentience, and the ability to perceive a relationship between oneself and one's environment. It has been defined from a more biological and causal perspective as the act of autonomously modulating attentional and computational effort, usually with the goal of obtaining, retaining, or maximizing specific parameters (food, a safe environment, family, mates). Consciousness may involve thoughts, sensations, perceptions, * Correspondence: Chris King http://www.dhushara.com E-Mail: chris@sexualparadox.org ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 15 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness moods, emotions, dreams, and an awareness of self, although not necessarily any particular one or combination of these.” Although these contain a constellation of meanings, in which mind is sometimes focused on the attributes of reasoned, or even language-based thought, and consciousness is sometimes given the more restrictive meaning of self-awareness, both contain a central arena of subjectivity and sentience, while conceding that the boundaries between consciousness and the sub- or unconscious may be fuzzy, both in varied brain states, from waking thought to sleep and coma, and in complex autonomous processes, which go on below the level of immediate awareness, during activities like driving a car. The central enigma we are referring to is not self-consciousness, but subjective consciousness – the capacity of a conscious sentient being to have a subjective experience of the existential condition, both of the everyday world, and of dream, memory and reflection iv, hallucination, psychedelic reverie, and other forms of internal subjective experience, not necessarily correlated with the immediate events of the physical world. In the face of the apparent causality of the Laplacian universe, many 20th century philosophers assigned to consciousness the orphan status of an epiphenomenon, a mere reflection of physical reality which could have no influence upon it. Some, such as Gilbert Ryle v, who coined the term „the ghost in the machine‟, went further, attempting to deconstruct the dualistic notion of mind altogether, as a form of false reasoning, claiming “that the idea of Mind as an independent entity, inhabiting and governing the body, should be rejected as a redundant piece of literalism carried over from the era before the biological sciences became established. The proper function of Mind-body language, he suggests, is to describe how higher organisms such as humans demonstrate resourcefulness, strategy, the ability to abstract and hypothesize and so on from the evidences of their behaviour” vi. Derived from the dualistic cosmology of Rene Descartes, this subjective arena is frequently referred to as the “Cartesian theatre”, sometimes constructively, as in Barrs vii, viii, who describes the theatre of the conscious in terms of working memory and its associated backdrops, but other times in somewhat disparaging terms as in Dennett ix, who, rather than explaining consciousness, as he claims, replaces it with a „multiple drafts model‟, more representative of the publishing industry, than either the conscious mind, or the sentient brain. Some of these criticisms arise from the practical difficulties of defining the borders of consciousness and the difficulty of finding the actual mechanisms for generating the „internal model of subjective reality‟ in terms of brain centers and their electrochemical dynamics, in the absence of clear evidence characterizing which brain states other than general focused global activity are responsible for consciousness, and as a result of the binding problem - how and where the disparate components of brain processing are all brought together in the hypothetical „Cartesian theatre‟ of the mind. Some of these problems are misplaced because they are falsely identifying brain and mind states. For example, the „binding problem‟ of brain dynamics may be resolved in practical terms through the phase coherence of excitations that are related, to form resonant neural circuits, differentiating them from the incoherent noise of the background, even though there is no specific brain centre as such where consciousness is generated. At issue is a fundamental frame of subjective reference, and a confusion on the part of brain researchers and philosophers alike, between the physical world, and our representation of it in the soISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 16 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness called „internal model of reality‟, which tends to become finessed in the dialectics of discourse on the problem. The veridical reality is that from birth to death each of us is a subjective conscious observer of the existential condition. All our experiences of the physical universe are without exception subjective conscious impressions, which only we as individual subjective observers have access to. Ultimately all data and scientific observations of the universe likewise achieve validation through the subjective conscious experience of the researchers and those who read their papers and witness their results. Far from being the fundamental components of veridical reality, the physical universe and all the constructs applied to it, from wave-particles through atoms and molecules, to complex biological systems such as the sentient brain and all our experiences of the everyday world around us are entirely, and without exception, purely and completely, abstract models of subjective conscious impressions, knitted together by a consensual agreement between subjective perceivers - that the table before us is solid and made of wood, plastic, or metal, as the case may be, and that our impressions of the world, from the lemon, or coffee cup on the table, to the horizon upon which we gaze, from a lonely hill top, looking out to sea, or the stars and galaxies we perceive in the sky, and entertain the humbling specters of an eventual demise in the heat death or big crunch, according to cosmological theories of the time. Subjective consciousness is thus the primary veridical conduit of existential reality, and the phenomena of the objective world, for all the convincing lessons that we are biological organisms which bleed if we are cut, and lose consciousness if we slumber, or are concussed, are consensual stabilities of our subjective consciousness. This remains true, notwithstanding our obvious dependence on our brain states, and the fact that some of the most bizarre and interesting states of altered consciousness arise from psychoactive molecules, which mimic neurotransmitters, or transport processes affecting synapses and thus radically altering brain states. However, based on the consistency of the scientific description of the physical universe and our part in it, as biological organisms dependent on our functioning brains to survive, this veridical logic has tended to become reversed, on the basis of the inaccessibility of subjective experiences to objective experimental testing and replication, so that consciousness has either been relegated to an epiphenomenon, merely reflecting, but not influencing, physical processes, e.g. in the brain, or banished to the wilderness, as „naïve or imaginary‟ concepts not well founded in the domain of philosophical or scientific discourse. Put in its completion, the relationship between consciousness and physical reality, rather than being either an epiphenomenon, or mere identity, or a fully divided Cartesian duality has characteristics more of the complementarity we see between the wave and particle aspects of the quantum world, in which a quantum can manifest wave, or particle natures, but not both at the same time, and in which the two aspects are also qualitatively symmetry-broken, one being discrete and the other continuous. It is this type of complementarity that Lao Tsu called a Tao or „way‟ of nature, and subjective consciousness and the objective physical universe clearly have just such a qualitative complementarity existentially. The nature of this complementarity and its fundamentality in the light of attempts on the part of functionalists to finesse consciousness to be merely an aspect of the attention process, or certain classes of excitation, such as those in the gamma range of the eeg (30-60 Hz), have been highlighted in David Chalmers‟ x enunciation of the so-called “Hard Problem” in consciousness research, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 17 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Fig 1: Baars‟ description of the Cartesian Theatre of consciousness and its „players‟ in terms of functional working memory processes. “explaining why we have qualitative phenomenal experiences. It is contrasted with the “easy problems” of explaining the ability to discriminate, integrate information, report mental states, focus attention, etc. Easy problems are easy because all that is required for their solution is to specify a mechanism that can perform the function” xi. For example Crick and Koch xii identify conscious states accompanying attentive processes with higher frequency electroencephalogram (eeg) signals in the gamma range. Defining consciousness as a functional process associated with attention and/or working memory is addressing an „easy‟ problem in consciousness research. The dilemma of the „hard‟ problem implies that no purely objective mechanism can suffice to explain subjective consciousness as a phenomenon in its own right. Baars‟ approach suggests that consciousness is associated with the whole brain in integrated correlated activity and is thus a property of the brain as a whole functioning entity rather than a product of some specific area, or system, such as the supplementary motor cortex xiii, xiv, xv. Furthermore, the approach rather neatly identifies the distinction between unconscious processing ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 18 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness and conscious experience in terms of whether the dynamic is confined to local or regional activity or is part of an integrated coherent global response. It is also consistent with there being broadly only one dominant stream of conscious thought and experience at a given time, as diverse forms of local processing gives way to an integrated global response. A series of experiments, many by teams working with Stanislas Dehaene, involving perceptual masking of brief stimuli to inhibit their entry into conscious perception xvi, xvii, xviii, xix, xx, xxi, xxii, studies of pathological conditions such as multiple sclerosis xxiii, xxiv, and brief episodes in which direct cortical electrodes are being used during operations for intractable epilepsy xxv have recently tended to confirm the overall features of Baars‟ model of consciousness founded on the global work space xxvi, xxvii, xxviii. This couples again rather nicely with a recently „discovered‟ system called the „default network‟ xxix, which was unearthed when background readings discarded from many brain scan studies were found to have common dynamical features. It has been proposed that the default network is an active brain process we drift into when not preoccupied in more essential tasks dominating our attention, and that it may have adaptive value in rehearsing strategic situations important for our survival. One can loosely identify the default network with the process of daydreaming, reminiscence, worrying and idle thought, but in these terms it looks clearly like a manifestation of global work space in action and hence provides another view on the global mechanisms being brought into play in conscious experience xxx. However, while this integrates the notion of conscious experience neatly in with the coordinated activity of the whole brain, it still doesn‟t explain how the brain generates subjective conscious experience, or indeed what the subjective aspect provides that has led to it being selected by evolutionary change. Completing the enigma of consciousness is the thorny spectre of „free-will‟, upon which all concepts of law and personal accountability hinge, as well as the assumptions of virtually every religious tradition. Although it is possible to couch questions of personal accountability in purely behavioural terms of social conditioning, the problem of free-will remains a shibboleth for the effectiveness of the scientific description. While many scientifically-trained people consider that they may in principle be a chemical machine driven by their brain states, the notion that subjective consciousness decision-making has no capacity whatever to influence the physical circumstances around leads to catatonic stasis. Everyone who gets up in the morning and does something so predictable as pouring a cup of coffee is making a direct investment in the notion that they are in some sense in control of their personal decisions and that their feeling of subjective autonomy is a valid expression of their condition. We act in the world on this assumption and upon this investment. Like subjective consciousness, free-will has become an orphan of the scientific description, seemingly inconsistent with the hypothesis that the behavior of the organism is purely a function of its brain reacting as an electrochemical machine, albeit a very complex one to the physical conditions of the organism‟s environment. However, from the outset of the quantum era, scientific researchers have noted that, since the quantum description of reality is not deterministic, the apparently stochastic nature of quantum uncertainty could provide a loophole for free-will, since the universe is no longer in-principle a Laplacian mechanism xxxi. Arthur Eddington xxxii, for example noted that the uncertainty of position of a synaptic vesicle was large enough to correspond to the thickness of the cell membrane, giving a possible basis for a change in neurodynamics arising from quantum uncertainty. Concluding that intentional volition might then be inconsistent with the chance probability-based calculations of particle statistic, Eddington then effectively suggested a form of hidden correlation in sub-quantum dynamics: a correlated behaviour of the individual particles of matter, which he assumed to occur for matter in liaison with mind. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 19 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness This „loophole‟ has led to a continuing tradition of physicists, mathematicians and brain researchers, speculating on various models by which the quantum world might interpenetrate with the sort of brain dynamics associated with conscious decision-making. We will look at these in detail, once we have examined the brain dynamics associated with conscious states. 2. A Dynamic View of the Conscious Brain Unlike the digital computer which is a serial digital device based on a discrete logic of 0s and 1s, the brain is a massively parallel dynamic organ. Although the action potential of long neuronal axons is a pulse coded firing rate proportional to membrane depolarization, many neurons and indeed those forming the organizing centre of many processes have continuously graded potentials. Thus although some individual neuron outputs may be pulsed action potentials, the electrical activity of the human brain, as expressed in the eeg consists of broad spectrum excitations indicative of chaos xxxiii , rather than the discrete resonances of ordered states. While some aspects of the eeg, such as the alpha rhythms of visual relaxation, may be housekeeping activities, as noted, oscillations in the gamma band have been associated with specific conscious thought processes. The basis of the eeg appears to lie in dynamic feedback between excitatory and coupled inhibitory neurons which set up mutual oscillations through a phase-delayed feedback loop, which implicates it as a major dynamical feature of cerebral processing. Fig 2: Evidence for both dynamical chaos and phase wave-front „holographic‟ processing. (a) Wavelet (morlet) transform, showing time evolution of amplitudes with a peak in the gamma band accompanying recognition of an anomalous note is consistent with phase-front processing. Broad-spectrum excitation (extended vertical distribution of frequencies) is also consistent with chaotic dynamics in the time domain. (b) Coherent distribution of electroencephalogram over the cortex, is consistent with globally coupled excitation. (c) Extended spatial distribution of cortical activation accompanying recognition of an odour. (d) Freeman‟s xxxiv xxxv model of olfactory recognition involves a transition from highenergy chaos on inhalation to enter a new or existing strange attractor basin as the energy is lowered on exhalation. Although this is a transition from chaos to an ordered outcome, the attractor may be a strange attractor, still supporting chaos locally within the basin. (e) Fourier transforms of electroencephalogram, showing broad-spectrum excitation and ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 20 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness correlations dimensions consistent with global chaotic dynamics. (f) Putative strange attractors in the electroencephalogram. While it might seem a contradiction that a brain state leading to any form of strategic decision could be chaotic, this is not actually the case. Ordered dynamical systems are inexorably drawn towards existing equilibria or resonant attractors making them insensitive to their surroundings. A key characteristic of chaotic dynamics is the „butterfly effect‟ – their arbitrary sensitivity on their initial, or boundary conditions – which in the words of Lorenz xxxvi enable fluctuations as small as those of a butterfly‟s wings to become amplified onto a tropical cyclone. The dynamical brain needs to be arbitrarily sensitive to its external conditions to respond effectively to the sometimes very subtle clues from the world around us that are absolutely essential for survival. A second key characteristic particularly of high-energy chaos is that it tends to explore the entire space of available states, sometimes called the „phase space‟, pseudo-randomly, so that it can appear anywhere, without prejudicing the outcome or missing an angle. Thus a fundamental theme, which has proved very useful in exploring brain dynamics, is a transition from chaos to order, in which an unstable high-energy chaotic exploration falls into an ordered attracting state, corresponding to recognition of a smell, or the „aha‟ of eureka that replaces the confusion of a problem with the flash of inspiration of an insight that appears to pop out of nowhere. While these excitations may be chaotic in the time domain, the dynamics accompanying perceptual recognition shows spatially correlated excitations similar to a hologram, in which the recognition process arises from populations of neurons firing together in a resonant phase-coherent manner, which distinguishes the recognized stimulus from the random ground swell of unrelated excitations. In this respect Karl Pribram xxxvii, xxxviii has noted that such processes are analogous, if not identical to, quantum measurement based on constructive phase-dependent wave interference. Phase coherence is consistent with chaotic dynamics in the time domain because mode-locked resonances between oscillators are a feature of non-linear systems. For example the heart beat, although approximately periodic, has dynamics comparable to a chaotic sinusoidally kicked rotator xxxix , which enables it to maintain mode-locked non-linear resonance with heart pacemaker cells which in turn are under central nervous system influence. By contrast with a digital computer which relies on gigahertz speed to perform discrete serial computations, the brain is a massively parallel organ, using wave-front processing, containing between 1010 and 1011 neurons each of which can have up to 104 excitatory and inhibitory synapses using a variety of chemical neurotransmitters to modulate electrochemical transfer. The extreme parallel-distributed basis of this processing is emphasized by the fact that there may only be around 10 serial synaptic junctions between sensory input and motor output. By contrast, a digital computer needs to make as many serial iterations as the computation requires before coming up with an answer, and the latest PCs allow for only up to 4 parallel units and even the largest super-computers have no more than a few thousand, principally used in a restricted form of matrix calculation, such as weather prediction, where each unit is essentially carrying out a similar computation on differing initial conditions. As shown in figure 3, the cerebral cortex of the mammalian (and thus human) brain consists of a large convoluted sheet about 1 m2 consisting of up to six layers of neurons, organized into functional columns on a scale of around 1 mm2 and mini-columns of 28–40 µm performing unique processing in a modular manner on aspects of sensory and cognitive processing, from lines of a given orientation, through sounds of a given pitch to more abstract features, such as recognition of specific ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 21 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness faces, or facial expressions, to associating the sound of a word with its semantic meaning. The cortex is broadly divided between frontal areas responsible for action and its abstraction in terms of plans and goals and perception and its abstractions in terms of spatial orientation (parietal), semantic meaning (temporal) and other creative, expressive, and classificatory skills. Fig 3: Structual outlines of the brain as a dynamical organ. (a) Major anatomical features including the cerebral cortex, its underlying driving centres in the thalamus, and surrounding limbic regions involving emotion and memory, including the cingulate cortex, hippocampus and amygdala. (b) Conscious activity of the cortex is maintained through the activity of ascending pathways from the thalamus and brain stem, including the reticular activating system and serotonin and nor-adrenaline pathways involved in light and dreaming sleep. (c) Processing in the cortex consists of up to six layers of neurons, forming modular processing columns around 1 mm in size, illustrated in cortex stained for ocular dominance (right). (d) Such modularity is dynamic as shown by changes on ocular dominance as a result of covering one eye during development. (e) Modular cortical processing illustrated in pet scans of cortical activity during language processing and the parallel processing of movement and colour in the visual cortex. The organization of these modular columns is dynamic to the extent that covering one eye will dynamically alter the balance of binocular dominance, and in a blind person even use visual areas for spatial orientation based on sound rather than vision. Many aspects of sensory processing occur in a parallel modular manner, for example, separate local regions process colour and movement, so that pathological conditions can result in loss of colour, or motion perception, independently of the other. The electrical activity of the cortex is driven by centres in the underlying nuclei in the thalamus, which have reciprocal connections with corresponding areas of the cortex. In isolation, cortical tissues tend to be electrochemically quiescent, which emphasizes that to a certain extent the cortex represents complex boundary conditions, modulating underlying thalamic excitations. Moreover the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 22 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness entire span of cortical activity accompanying waking consciousness is dependent on a general level of excitatory activity welling up from the brain stem centres of the reticular activating system and major modes of dynamical brain activity modulation, such as light and dreaming sleep are likewise modulated through ascending nor-epinephrine, dopamine and serotonin pathways passing from the brain stem upwards to permeate specific layers of the whole cortex. Active cognition is believed to involve an interplay of so-called „working memory‟ in which frontal regions modulating the goals and direction of the thought process, are interacting with parietal and temporal areas providing the spatial and semantic information involved. There are actually two cortices, left and right, connected by large parallel tracts of nerve fibres, the corpus callosum. The left and right cortices are lateralized to varying degrees, particularly in men, so that language articulacy and other more structured forms of cognitive processing are predominantly in the left cortex and more generalized diffuse types of processing occurs in the right cortex. Consistent with edge of chaos processing involving a transition to order from chaos, studies of the kind of insight process that leads to phenomena such as Archimedes‟ “Eureka!” xl appear to stem from the right anterior superior temporal gyrus, when distracting structured „thinking‟ activities of the left hemisphere have been replaced by the relatively „contemplative‟ relaxation of alpha activity. Fig 4: Quantum fractality differs from classical fractality in that it becomes discrete at the quantum level. Fractal scale transformations emerge from quantum non-linearities forming the chemical bond, in emergent stages through tertiary and quaternary molecular structures, to cellular organelles, cells, tissues and finally the whole organism, with its successive bifurcations of development to form the tissue layers and later, interactive migrations of specific cell types. Nervous system organization is thus fractal, running from the molecular level of ion-channels, to neurotransmitter vesicles and synaptic junctions (upper), then to neurons (lower right), then to neuronal complexes such as mini-columns (lower left) and finally to whole brain activation. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 23 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness In addition, feedback systems involving emotional recognition, flight and fight reactions and the establishment of long-term sequential memory surround the periphery of the cortex in the so-called limbic system, comprising the cingulate cortex, fornix, hippocampus, amygdala and associated structures. The semantic significance of the temporal cortex appears also to be able to combine with the intense emotional significance of the closely associated amygdala to create mystical and other symphonic experiences in temporal lobe epilepsy, a region coined by Ramachandran xli, xlii as “the God Spot” for this mix of emotional significance and ultimate meaning. This association may have a genetic basis in religiosity xliii as an evolutionary adaptation enabling larger, more dominant societies xliv . 3. Edge of Chaos, Self-organized Criticality and Fractal Sensitivity Between the global level, the cellular level and the molecular level are a fractal cascade of central nervous processes, which in combination, make it theoretically possible for a quantum fluctuation to become amplified into a change of global brain state. The neuron is itself a fractal with multiply branching dendrites and axonal terminals, which are essential to provide the many-to-many synaptic connections between neurons, which make adaptation possible. Furthermore, like all tissues, biological organization is achieved through non-linear interactions which begin at the molecular level and pass upward in a series of scale transformations through supra-molecular complexes such as ion channels and the membrane, through organelles such as synaptic junctions, to neurons and then to neuronal comp-lexes such as cortical mini-columns and finally to global processes. At the molecular level, the ion channel is activated by one, or two, neurotransmitter molecules. Because neurons tend to tune to their threshold with a sigmoidal activation function, which has maximum slope at threshold, they are capable of becoming critically poised at their activation threshold. It is thus possible in principle for a single ion channel, suitably situation on the receptor neuron, e.g. at the cell body where an activation potential begins to act as the trigger for activation. The lessons of the butterfly catastrophe combined with evidence for transitions from chaos in perceptual recognition therefore suggest that if a brain state is in a transition at the edge of chaos or is in a state of self organized criticality, in which the system tunes to a critical state such as a sand pile where there are fractal „avalanches‟ of activity global instabilities, which are encoding for the unresolved perceptual or conceptual context may be „resolved‟ through amplification of a local fluctuation at the neuronal, synaptic or ion-channel level. Although neuroscientists have tended to discount the idea that micro-instabilities could lead to global changes in brain dynamics, on the basis that mass action will overwhelm such small effects, a variety of lines of evidence have demonstrated that fluctuations in single cells can lead to a change of brain state. In addition to the issue of sensitive dependence in chaotic systems, two further lines of evidence suggest changes in ion channels and/or single cells can influence global brain states. The first of these phenomena is stochastic resonance xlv, in which the occurrence of noise, somewhat paradoxically, leads to the capacity of ion channels to sensitively excite hippocampal cells and in turn to cause a change in global brain state. In this sense noise is playing a similar role to the ergodic properties of dynamical chaos, which likewise distribute the dynamic pseudo-randomly and so prevent the dynamic getting stuck into the rut of a given ordered attractor and it is thus able to fully explore its „phase‟ or dynamical space. Thermodynamic „annealing‟ is likewise used in classical artificial neural nets to avoid them becoming locked in sub-optimal local minima. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 24 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Fig 5: Evidence for complex system coupling between the molecular and global levels. Stochastic activation of single ion channels in hippocampal cells (a) leads to activation of the cells (c). Activation of such individual cells can in turn lead to formation of global excitations as a result of stochastic resonance (d). Individuals cells are also capable of issuing action potentials in synchronization with peaks in the eeg (e). Fig 6: Left: Single pre-synaptic pyramidal action potential leads to multiple post-synaptic excitations. Right: Structure of chandelier or axon-axonal cells with dendrites (blue) and axons (red). More recently it has been discovered that a specific class of cortical neuron, the chandelier cell is capable of changing the patterns of excitation between the pyramidal neurons that drive active output to other cortical regions and to the peripheral nervous system, in such a way that single action potentials of human neurons are sufficient to recruit Hebbian-like neuronal assemblies that are proposed to participate in cognitive processes. Chandelier cells, which were only discovered in the 1970s, and are more common in humans than other mammals such as the mouse, and were originally ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 25 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness thought to be purely inhibitory, are axon-axonal cells, which can result in specific poly-synaptic activation of pyramidal cells xlvi, xlvii. The research paper and review note: The increased signal-to-noise ratio in the network provided by hyperpolarizing GABAergic synapses is further amplified by the coincident action of chandelier cells, resulting in a sparse and potentially task-selective activation of pyramidal neurons. Thus, the human microcircuit appears to be tuned for unitary-EPSP–activated Hebbian-like functional cell assemblies that were proposed as building blocks of higher-order cortical operations and could contribute to single cortical cell–initiated movements and behavioral responses. This reveals an extremely efficacious means of activity propagation in the cortical network. Although earlier work had shown polysynaptic activations following a single chandelier spike, the current study demonstrates much longer responses. Moreover, one of the most interesting results relates to the temporal structure of the activity patterns elicited after stimulation of a single neuron. While most of them appear to propagate through the circuit with increasing disorganization, occasionally the authors were able to trigger an amazingly precise temporal pattern. This implies that the microcircuit is capable under some circumstances of generating patterns of activation with low jitter and high temporal precision. Given the potential for fluctuations at the molecular, ion-channel, synaptic or neuronal level to become the organizing centre resolving instabilities in global brain dynamic, it becomes possible to form an edge-of-chaos model for resolving situations of cognition involving intuition, insight and the „eureka‟ attributed to Archimedes‟ sudden discovery of his principle. In this model, the dynamic of the „problem‟ remains unresolved and thus contains instabilities, which in turn become sensitive to perturbation on descending fractal scales leading to the molecular and quantum level. Fig 7: (a) EEG sweeps are coherent when anticipating a regular tone but decoherent when the tone becomes erratic in its timing l. (bi) Neural connection hubs are scale independent in terms of frequency forming a small world network consistent with self-organized criticality, (bii) Hubs compared in resting and tapping. (c),(d) Intelligence measures correlate positively with phase shift duration and negatively with phase lock duration li. (e) Evidence for self organized criticality. Sorted correlation matrix and dendrogram of avalanches in a cortical slice liii, liv. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 26 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Such an unstable dynamic is tending to a transition from higher-energy chaos to order by developing a new attractor, out of the fractal diversity of repelling attractors in the chaotic dynamic. In terms of an active brain state, this would be likely to correspond to a global excitation, say in the gamma range containing several uncorrelated phase components representing features of the problem that cannot be put into coherent relationship. Hence the essential instability at the fractal level would consist of a transition from multiple uncorrelated phases to the emergence of a correlated „organizing center‟ resolving the global instability. A recent growth area of research consistent with, but not limited to the edge of chaos concept, is the development of models based on self-organized criticality, the tuning of processes from sand piles to earthquakes towards a critical state in which fractal avalanches maintain the process in a critical state. In the case of a sand pile, as in an hour-glass, if the angle is too steep, massive avalanches return it to the critical angle. Likewise, if it is too shallow more sand will pile up with few or on avalanches until the critical angle is reached. Edge of chaos processes share this tuning towards the critical state at the boundary, but the reasoning also extends to stochastic systems such as the Ising model xlviii of magnetization. Karl Pribram‟s concept of the holographic brain xlix has drawn attention to the deep analogy, and possible physical correspondence, between phase coherence in brain dynamics and the wave phase basis of all quantum measurements. Phase coherence provides a basis for distinguishing the processes the brain is paying attention to from the decoherent groundswell of background noise. Key experimental investigations l, li have repeatedly confirmed a relationship between phase coherence in central nervous electrodynamics and recognized, or anticipated, stimuli. More recently a variety of key experimental research results lii have shown a close correspondence between self-organized criticality and brain dynamics in processing real perceptual and cognitive tasks. These are reflected in several different forms of analysis. Study of avalanches is isolated neuronal circuits liii liv shows the avalanches are tuned to a critical threshold where a given avalanche is like to elicit only one further one, consistent with self-organized criticality in neural circuits. The fractal power law dynamics of active brains states has been found to correspond closely with self-organized criticality related to computational simulations of the Ising model lv. Brain processing states have also been found to reflect a small-world network architecture consistent with selforganized criticality lvi, lvii across all frequency scales used in electroencephalogram studies. Smallworld networks lie between regular networks, where each node is connected to its nearest neighbours, and random networks, with no regular structure but many long-distance connections between nodes at opposite sides of the network. A small-world network enables communication between any two locations of the network through just a few nodes - the "six degrees of separation" reputed to link any two people in the world. In the brain, the number is closer to 13. In an intriguing 2008 study lviii, high intelligence, as measured on IQ scores, was found to consistently correlate with longer times of phase decoherence, between phase-locked coherent states, and shorter phase-locked episodes. The idea behind this is that longer decoherence times corresponds to bringing larger systems of neurocircuits into play, in cognitively analyzing a given situation and that shorter phase-locked episodes corresponds to not getting stuck in a non-adaptive so called „fixed position‟. By contrast with the earlier work on chaos in brain dynamics which tended to deal predominantly with house-keeping states, rather than active cognition, these studies involve intelligence and thought processes. They are consistent both with a stochastic approach to criticality and with edge of chaos ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 27 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness dynamics in the active brain. 4. Sensory Transduction and Subjective Experience The occurrence of putative sensory transduction genes in the central nervous system is consistent with a novel biophysical model supporting subjective consciousness (King lix) - that the distributed functioning of the central nervous system provides an 'internal sensory system' which can generate abstracted sensory experiences of reality forming an 'internal model of reality' using the same physical principles as are involved in sensory transduction in a bi-directional manner, enabling coherent generation and reception of biophysical excitations, particularly those associated with vision and audition. Olfaction has a fundamentally different basis, both in brain architecture and in the fact that it involves specific molecular receptors, which cannot regenerate their stimuli by reverse transduction, although there is evidence for olfactory synesthesia. Some forms of synesthesia, such as responding with feeling to seeing another person's finger touched, may also involve specific interactive circuitry, including mirror neurons. Recent research in whole genome mapping of the mouse brain has made it possible to investigate the potential central nervous function of genes that might otherwise be associated primarily with peripheral sensory transduction. At the same time, the actual molecules involved in sense transduction, in vision, hearing and touch are being characterized. The first putative transduction molecule for mammalian touch, stomatin-like protein 3 (SLP3, or Stoml3) was reported this year in Nature, and putative molecules in the auditory transduction pathway, epsin, and cadherin 23 (otocadherin) have only been reported in the last five years and otoferlin in 2006. Research into the genetic evolution of the visual system has also unearthed provocative new findings about vision, which became the trigger for this hypothesis. In parallel with the usual cilia-based photo-transducer molecule c-opsin are retinal ganglion cells, which use melanopsin, or r-opsin related to insect opsins (based on organelles called rhabdomeres), which depolarize rather than hyperpolarize. It has also been discovered that both types of opsin work in opposition in the reptile parietal (pineal) eye. At an even more basic level, excitable neurons have ion channels which undergo conformation changes associated with voltage, and orbital or „ligand‟-binding, both of internal effectors such as Gproteins and externally via neurotransmitters, such as acetyl-choline. They also have osmotic and mechano-receptive activation, as in hearing and can be also activated by photoreception in certain species. At a ground level all conformation changes of ions channels are capable of exchanging photons, phonons and orbital perturbations representing a form of quantum synesthesia. Attention has more recently been focused on biophotons as a possible basis of processing in the visual cortex based on quantum releases in mitochondrial redox reactions lx, lxi, lxii. Microtubules have also been implicated. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 28 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Fig 7b: Large scale mouse brain expression profiles of encephalopsin (Opn3), otocadherin (Cdh23), espin (Espnl), otoferlin (Otof) and Stom3 (Allen Brain Atlas lxiii) illustrate the wide and discretely specific expression of sensory transduction molecules for three senses, vision, hearing and touch in the central nervous system. Does this mean that the 'internal model of reality' evokes subjective experience using similar molecules to the physical senses? 5. Computational Intractability, Classical Chaos and Quantum Uncertainty The apparent contradiction between the idea of precise classical computation (which abhors disrupting noise) and the apparent unruliness of chaotic excitation, (which, although being in principle deterministic, becomes unpredictable, through amplification of small discrepancies due to sensitive dependence, resulting in an „ergodic‟ trajectory, filling phase space in a similar to a random walk) can be resolved immediately we look more closely at the sort of computational problems a living nervous system actually needs to solve in minimal time to survive. The traveling salesman problem – how to find the shortest path around n cities – is classed as np-complete lxiv. Characteristically to classically compute a given solution requires checking each of the (n  1)! possible cyclic paths 2 and finding the smallest. However because this is superexponential, even for a small number of cities like say 25, the computation time required stretches out to the age of the universe. The same consideration applies to virtually every environmental decision-making process a living organism faces, such as which path to take to the water hole, since these all involve an exponentially increasing number of combinations of contingent factors in the open environment. An animal cannot afford to wait more than a split second making a real survival decision, or it may be leapt upon by a tiger and consumed, so nervous systems have to find an immediate real-time way of solving any such potentially intractable decision-making problem. The solution used by artificial neural nets, which model a problem like the traveling salesman problem as an energy minimization on a landscape representing the distances between the cities, is to apply thermodynamic annealing, starting with a high temperature which prevents the dynamic becoming stuck in a high local minimum, gradually reducing ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 29 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness the temperature of random fluctuations, arriving at a reasonable sub-optimal local minimum. Statistical computational methods of solution work similarly. The Freeman model of perception fig 2(d) uses a transition from high-energy chaos to a lower energy strange-attractor in much the same way, using the high-energy chaos to avoid the system becoming trapped in a far-from-optimality attractor until the „phase‟ space of the system has been fully explored. Such a system provides for a smooth transition between a situation in which the boundary conditions lead to a clear computational outcome and hence a decision based on one choice having a manifestly higher probability of survival, and other situations, in which, like the problem of Archimedes‟ possibly crown, there is no predisposing resolution of the system because the problem has not yet been solved and the contextual factors remain ambiguous, or inconsistent. Unlike the discrete Von Neumann or Turing machine, biological nervous systems appear to work on dynamical principles which provide the capacity to induce a transition from chaos to order, where the classical computer would run into the Turing halting problem – unable to determine whether, or when, the computational process will end. Clearly such a transition will involve sensitive dependence on initial and other boundary conditions and will be in a classical sense unpredictable (just as the butterfly effect is) and since it involves molecular processes at the quantum level, may invoke quantum uncertainty as well. We thus need to investigate how these two effects might come together, and explore whether and how they might play upon the processes of perceptual recognition and conceptual insight. The first point of reference is a brief review of the wave-particle relationship and how the uncertainty relationship comes about. By Einstein‟s law E  h , the energy of a particle is equivalent to the frequency of the wave as the momentum is likewise to the wavelength. If we then want to measure the energy, this will be equivalent to measuring the frequency, but as we can‟t sample parts of a quantum wave, the only way we can know the frequency is effectively to count the beats against a 1 between successive fronts where the two waves are in  h phase, giving constructive interference, then gives us the uncertainty relation E  t ; . 2 reference frequency. The time delay t  Constructive interference from corresponding phase fronts passing through two slits also gives us the basis in wave-particle complementarity of the two-slit interference experiment fig 8. Complementarity is demonstrated in the release of a photon from an excited atom in the bulb, as a discrete localized „particle‟, corresponding to an orbital transition from an excited atomic orbit. The photon then travels through both slits as a wave, which overlaps itself to form bright bands of constructive interference and is again absorbed as a particle by a silver atom on the photographic film. Although these discrete particles arrive one at a time and could appear anywhere the wave function is not precisely zero, as numbers of particles arrive, their statistical probability of occurrence is distributed according to the complex square of the amplitude of the wave P   *  . The particle incidence gives rise to one of the fundamental unresolved questions of quantum theory. As the wave function doesn‟t determine where the particle should end up, it is deemed that the wave function has „collapsed‟ at the point the particle is detected and unlike the linear evolution of the wave function, this collapse process is stochastically unpredictable, leading to the idea that there may be a deeper „hidden variable‟ theory explaining how each photon actually „decides‟ where it ends up. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 30 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Fig 8: Top right: Beats of constructive wave interference determine the uncertainty principle. Bottom: Two-slit interference experiment illustrates wave-particle complementarity. Top left: Cat Paradox experiment. The contrast between quantum theory, which leads only to parallel probabilities that the photon could be anywhere in its wave function, and the real world in which unique histories always occur, led to Schrödinger coining the „cat paradox‟, in which a cat is predicted to be both alive and dead by quantum theory with differing probabilities, if a Geiger counter is set to break a vial of cyanide, but when we open the box the cat is either alive, or dead but not both. Various approaches, including hidden variable theories and quantum decoherence lxv caused by interaction with „third-party‟ quanta have been invoked to explain this process but none eliminate the essential complementarity. When we come to consider how systems, which would classically display features of chaos behave in the quantum world, we find a series of apparent contradictions, in the so-called quantum suppression of chaos. In fig 9 the quantum stadium is used to illustrate several features of this phenomenon. The classical stadium billiard is chaotic because the periodic orbits, some of which are shown in (d), are unstable, so that a ball with a trajectory differing by an arbitrarily small amount is deflected by increasing amounts by the curved boundary of the region, so that the periodic orbits are all repelling and almost every orbit is a chaotic trajectory which eventually fills the region „ergodically‟ in an unpredictable, pseudo-random manner, as in (a), due to sensitive dependence on initial conditions. The quantum wave function solutions (b) work differently, displaying peaks of the probability function around the periodic orbits, defying their repelling nature. The reasons can be easily understood of we use a semi-classical approximation, by releasing a small wave packet and watching the way it bounces back and forth as in (c). Whenever the wavelength of the packet forms a rational relationship with the length around a transit any of the reflecting periodic orbits, we get an eigenfunction of the quantum wave function, which constructively interferes with itself, as a standing wave, just as do the orbitals of an atom, to form a probability peak around the periodic orbit. Even ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 31 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness when a trajectory is a little off the periodic orbit, the spreading wave packet still overlaps itself contributing to the probability peak. Fig 9: Quantum chaos: The classical stadium billiards is chaotic. A given trajectory has sensitive dependence on initial conditions. As well as space-filling chaotic orbits (a) lxvi, the stadium is densely filled with repelling periodic orbits, three of which are shown in black in (d). Because they are repelling, neighbouring orbits are thrown further away, rather than being attracted into a stable periodic orbit, so arbitrary small deviations lead to a chaotic orbit, causing almost all orbits to be chaotic. The quantum solution of the stadium potential well (b) lxvii and (d) lxviii shows „scarring‟ of the wave function along these repelling orbits, thus repressing the classical chaos, through probabilities clumping on the repelling orbits. A semi-classical simulation (c) shows why this is so. A small wavelet bounces back and forth, forming a periodic wave pattern, because even when slightly off the repelling orbit the wave still overlaps itself and can form standing wave constructive interference when its energy and frequency corresponds to one of the eigenvalues of a periodic orbit, even though the orbit is classically repelling. The quantum solution is scarred on precisely these orbits (d). This causes resonances such as absorption peaks of a highly magnetically excited atom (e) to coincide with the eigenfunctions of the repelling periodic orbits, just as the orbital waves of an atom constructively interfere with themselves, in completing an orbit to form a standing wave, like that of a plucked string. The result is that, over time, in the quantum system, although the behaviour may be transiently chaotic, it eventually settles into a periodic solution. Experimental realizations such as the scanning tunneling view of an electron on a copper sheet bounded by a stadium of carefully-placed iron atoms (f) lxix, confirm the general picture, although, in this experiment, tunneling leaked the wave function outside too much to demonstrate proper scarring. The semi-classical approach matches closely to the full quantum calculation (g). The end result is that for a variety of closed quantum systems, wave spreading eventually represses classical chaos by scarring, causing the periodic eigenfunctions to become eventual solutions of any ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 32 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness time-dependent problem, although the initial trajectory behaves erratically, just as does an orbit in the classical situation. For example, a periodically kicked quantum rotator lxx, lxxi will stochastically gain energy, just as in the classical situation, until a quantum break time lxxii, after which it will become trapped in one of the quantum solutions. A highly excited atom in a magnetic field will have its absorbance peaks at the periodic solutions, and quantum tunneling will likewise use scarred eigenvalues as its principle modes of tunneling lxxiii, lxxiv. These constraints do not apply to open systems, such as molecular kinetics where diffusion can carry molecules relatively vast distances. As a rough example, a glycine molecule at biological temperatures has a self-diffraction angle of wave-spreading of about 6.5o, showing this effect is significant lxxv. Moreover, the larger the system, the longer the delay until quantum break time sets in. The implication is that sensitive dependence on initial conditions eventually gives way, at the quantum level, to quantum uncertainty of the scarred orbit, globally traversing the space concerned, and it does so by performing a transition from chaos to order dependent on the initial conditions initially following a chaotic trajectory and eventually entering into a periodic orbit. Since a chaotic system, whether quantum or classical has a dense set of periodic orbits there, is potentially an infinite number of these, although quantum separation of chaotic eigenfunctions lxxvi, another feature of quantum repression of chaos, will lead to only a finite number being available at the energies concerned. The implications are threefold: 1. Quantum suppression of chaos leads to a situation where: (a) quantum chaotic systems model a transition from chaos to order, just as insight processes involve a transition from chaos to order, and (b) quantum suppression of chaos by phase coherence parallels the way brain processes may use coherence to distinguish critical processes in conscious attention from the background. 2. The eigenfunctions of chaotic quantum processes are globally distributed over the phase space and thus, in so far as the outcomes depend on stochastic properties of wave-particle reduction, enable uncertainty to affect outcomes on the scale of the phase space orbit. 3. In processes that involve open systems, or large phase spaces whose quantum break time is much longer than the real time window, chaos and quantum uncertainty may combine to amplify uncertainty, so that it can affect global outcomes. An indication of how the transition from classical to quantum chaos might lead to complex forms of quantum entanglement can be gleaned from an ingenious experiment forming a quantum analogue of the kicked top using an ultra-cold cesium atom kicked by both a laser pulse and a magnetic field. In figure 9b is shown the classical dynamical phase space of the kicked top showing domains of order where there is periodic motion and complementary regions of chaos where there is sensitive dependence on initial conditions as a result of horseshoe stretching and folding. In the quantum system (second row) in the ordered region (left), the linear entropy of the system is reduced and there is no quantum entanglement between the orbital and nuclear spin of the atom. However in the chaotic region (right) there is no such dip, as the orbital and nuclear spins have become entangled as a result of the chaotic perturbations of the quantum top‟s motion lxxvii, lxxviii. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 33 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Fig 9b Classical and quantum kicked top and entropies. 6. The Evolution of Chaotic Sensitivity and the Emergence of Consciousness We now return to the biological arena, to consider how nervous systems might have evolved the dynamics we associate with consciousness. Is the sort of dynamics we associate with the conscious brain a product of the complex interconnectivity of circuitry of relatively trivial neurons, as work with artificial neural nets and computational approaches, such as artificial intelligence might suggest? Or is it a fundamental aspect of living cells, which evolved with the earliest eukaryotes? Is it in the senses of a single celled-organism that we will naturally find the origin of chaotic excitability as a source for the quantum sensitivity that ultimately shaped the evolution of the conscious brain in higher organisms? A realistic assessment of pyramidal neurons confirms that they are very complex dynamical systems in their own right, far from the trivial additive units which McCulloch-Pitts „neurons‟ present in theoretical artificial networks, containing up to 104 synaptic junctions, having a variety of excitatory and inhibitory synaptic inputs involving up to four or five different types of neurotransmitter, with differing effects depending on their location on dendrites, the cell body, or axon-axonal connections. Furthermore many of the critical features we associate with neurons, and their associated neuroglia, in the conscious brain, including excitability and the use of neurotransmitter molecules, are not only shared by other cells in the human body, but extend down to the earliest single-celled eukaryotes lxxix. The connection between bursting and beating in excitable cells was established by the Chay-Rinzel model and ensuing experiments lxxx, which established chaotic dynamics in neurons, pancreatic b-cell ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 34 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness exocytosis, and inter-nodal cells in the alga Nitella lxxxi. The association between excitability and exocytosis spanning the eukaryotes lxxxii is doubly significant in that, in addition to graded electrochemical and action potentials in the neuron, synaptic vesicles are also produced by exocytosis. Earlier work had already demonstrated membrane potentials in Amoeba proteus lxxxiii associated with pseudopod formation, and action potentials in the amoeba Chaos chaos lxxxiv, lxxxv, aptly so-named by Linnaeus lxxxvi. In ciliated protozoa, such as Paramecium,lxxxvii, lxxxviii and Tetrahymena lxxxix action potentials are associated with the motile actions of cilia in cellular locomotion. Fig 10: Real-time purposive behavior in single cells (a) Paramecium reverses, turns right and explores a cul-de-sac. (b) Human neutrophil chases an escaping bacterium (black), before engulfing it. (c) Chaos chaos engulfs a paramecium. Action potentials in Chaos chaos (d) and paramecium (e). Period 3 perturbed excitations in Nitella confirm chaos. (g) Frog retinal rod cells are sensitive to single quanta in an ultra-low intensity beam, with an average rate of one photon per click, but sometimes zero, or two, due to uncertainty in the beam. The aggregation of slime moulds such as Dictyostellium is mediated by cyclic-AMP xc, xci. The ciliated protozoan Tetrahymena pyriformis xcii, xciii and flagellated Crithidia jasciculata xciv utilize serotonin, and the former also metabolizes dopamine and epinephrine xcv, xcvi. Tetrahymena pyriformis also has circadian light-related melatonin expression xcvii. Both amoebae and ciliates show purposive coordinated behaviour over real time, as do individual human cells such as macrophages. The multi-nucleate slime mould Physarum polycephalum can solve shortest path mazes and demonstrate a memory of a rhythmic series of stimuli, apparently using a biological clock to predict the next pulse xcviii, xcix. Chaotic excitation provides an excitable single cell with a generalized quantum sense organ. Sensitive dependence would enable such a cell to gain feedback about its external environment, perturbed by a variety of quantum modes - chemically through molecular orbital interaction, electromagnetically through photon absorption, electrochemically through the perturbations of the fluctuating fields generated by the excitations themselves, and through acoustic and mechanical interaction. Amoebae for example, although they lack specific sense organelles, are highly sensitive to chemical and electrical signals, as well as to bright light. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 35 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Such excitability in the single cell would predate the computational function of neural nets, making dynamical chaos fundamental to the evolution of neuronal computing rather than vice versa. A single cell has no capacity to solve decision-making problems through a neural net consisting of many cells, so has to rely on membrane excitation and internal regulatory systems, such as biological clocks and genetic switches to provide memory and a strategy for survival. Fig 11: Hydra has only an undifferentiated nerve net (a), yet catches prey by coordinated action of its tentacles (b) and has no less than 12 different forms of motion, from stages of somersaulting to snail-like gliding. When we move to the earlier metazoa such as Hydra, we already have many of the neurotransmitters, G-linked protein receptors, ion channels and essentially all the neuronal machinery we associate with vertebrate nervous systems, causing the basis of central nervous system function and dynamics to be common to the entire animal kingdom. Hydra, which supports only a primitive diffuse neural net and whose tissues can dynamically reorganize themselves, for example if it is turned inside out, we find the organism has a rich repertoire of up to 12 forms of „intuitive‟ locomotion, and is able to coordinate tentacle movements and tumbling, and other forms of movement using similar global dynamics to those in amoebae and Paramecium, or a more advanced organism, such as a snail. We can thus see that nervous systems have arisen from the adaptive dynamics of individual eucaryote cells, rather than being composed of a logical network made out of essentially trivial formal neurons. As we move up the evolutionary tree to complex nervous systems, such as in vertebrates, we still see the same dynamical features, now expressed in whole system excitations such as the eeg, in which excitatory and inhibitory neurons still provide a basis for broad-spectrum oscillation, phase coherence and chaos in the global dynamics, with the synaptic organization enabling the dynamics to resolve complex context-sensitive decision-making problems, involving memories of past situations and specific adaptations to current ones. However the immediate decision-making situations around which life or death results, in the theatre of conscious attention in real time, are qualitatively similar in nature to those made by single celled organisms, such as Paramecium, based strongly on immediate sensory input, combined with a short term anticipation of immediate threats, in a context of remembered situations from the past that bear upon the current existential strategy. Looking back more deeply in time, chaotic excitability and electrochemistry generally may be one of the founding features of eucaryote cells, dating from the RNA era, before coded protein translation c, ci, cii . Nucleotide coenzymes, believed to be molecular fossils from the RNA era, pervade electron transport pathways. Key chemical modifiers may have been precursors of the amine-based ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 36 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness neurotransmitters, spanning acetyl-choline, serotonin, catecholamines and amino acids such as glutamate and GABA, several of which have potential pre-biotic or trans-biotic status. Positive amines for example may have chemically complemented negatively charged phosphate-based lipids in modulating membrane excitability in primitive cells without requiring complex coded proteins. The sense modes we experience are not simply biological as such, but more fundamentally are the qualitative modes of quantum interaction between molecular matter and the physical universe. They thus have potential cosmological status. Vision deals with interaction between photons and orbitals, hearing with the harmonic excitations of molecules and membrane solitons, as evidenced in the action potentials arising from cochlear cells. Smell is the consequence of orbital-orbital interaction, as is taste. Touch is a hybrid sense involving a mixture of these. The limits to the sensitivity of nervous systems are likewise constrained by the physics of quanta, rather than biological limits. This is exemplified by the capacity of retinal rod cells to record single quanta fig 10(g), and by the fact that membranes of cochlear cells oscillate by only about one H atom radius at the threshold of hearing, well below the scale of individual thermodynamic fluctuations and vastly below the bilayer membrane thickness. Moth pheromones are similarly effective at concentrations consistent with one molecule being active, as are the sensitivities of some olfactory mammals. The very distinct qualitative differences between vision, hearing, touch and smell do not appear to have a physiological support in the very similar patterns of electrical excitation evoked in their cortical areas. However, if all these excitations can occur simultaneously in the single cell, chaotic excitation could effectively become a form of cellular multi-sensory synaesthesia ciii, which is later specialized in the brain in representing each individual sense mode. Thus in the evolution of the cortical senses from the most diffuse, olfaction, the mammalian brain may be using an ultimate universality, returning to the original quantum modes of physics in a way which can readily be expressed in differential organization of the visual, auditory, and somato-sensory cortices according to a single common theme of quantum excitability. This is consistent with cortical plasticity, which for example, enables a blind person to use their visual areas for other sensory modes. It is thus natural to postulate that cellular „consciousness‟, as a focused global dynamical electrochemical response to a cell‟s environment, is a pivotal feature which as been elaborated and conserved by nervous systems because it has had unique survival value for the organism. It is a logical conclusion that the conscious brain has been selected by evolution because its biophysical properties provide access to an additional principle of predictivity not possessed by formal computational systems. One of the key strategies of survival implicated in brain dynamics is anticipation and prediction of events civ, cv, cvi, cvii. Computational systems achieve this by a combination of deductive logic and heuristic calculation of contingent probabilities. However quantum non-locality may also provide another avenue for anticipation, which might be effective even across the membrane of a single cell, if wave reductions are correlated in a non-local manner in space-time. We shall examine this possibility next. 7. Quantum Entanglement and the Transactional Interpretation All forms of quantum field theory stem from the special relativistic form of the energy E   p 2  m2 . This gives two solutions, one a positive energy solution traveling in the usual (retarded) direction in time and the other a negative energy (advanced) solution, traveling backwards ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 37 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness in time. All quantum mechanical calculations are based on these dual solutions of special relativity, including those of quantum electrodynamics, the most accurate physical theory ever devised cviii. Wheeler and Feynman noted that „absorber‟ theory cix, in which the advanced solutions were included, gave the same predictions as descriptions in which the advanced solutions were omitted as unphysical. Indeed all Feynman space-time diagrams implicitly contain both the advanced and retarded solutions. For a photon, which is its own anti-particle, the advanced and retarded solutions of electron-electron repulsion by exchanging virtual particles fig 12(3a-c) are identical, as a negative energy advanced photon IS a positive energy retarded photon. Likewise electron scattering becomes positron creationannihilation when time reversed (d). The delayed choice experiment and quantum erasure, fig 12 (1,2) confirm that changes after emission, or even at absorption, can influence the path taken by a photon or other exchanged particle cx. In John Cramer‟s transactional interpretation cxi, such an advanced „backward traveling‟ wave in time gives a neat explanation, not only for the above effect, but also for the probability aspect of the quantum in every quantum experiment. Instead of one photon traveling between the emitter and absorber, there are two shadow waves, which superimposed make up the complete photon. The emitter transmits an offer wave both forwards and backwards in time, declaring its capacity to emit a photon. The potential absorbers of this photon transmit a corresponding confirmation wave. These, traveling backwards in time, send a hand-shaking signal back to the emitter, fig 12(4a). The offer and confirmation waves superimpose constructively to form a real photon only on the spacetime path connecting the emitter to the absorber. The transactional interpretation offers the only viable explanation for the apparently instantaneous connections between detectors in pair-splitting EPR experiments in which a pair of correlated photons are emitted by a single atom cxii, cxiii, cxiv, in which neither of the photons has a defined polarization until one of them is measured, upon which the other immediately has complementary polarization. In fig 12(4b), rather than a super-luminal connection between detectors A1 and A2, the two photons‟ advanced waves meet at the source emission point in a way which enables the retarded waves to be instantaneously correlated at the detectors. One can also explain the arrow of time, if the cosmic origin is a reflecting boundary that causes all the positive energy real particles in our universe to move in the retarded direction we all experience in the arrow of time and increasing entropy cxv. The hand-shaking space-time relation implied by the transactional interpretation makes it possible that the apparent randomness of quantum events masks a vast interconnectivity at the sub-quantum level, reflecting Bohm‟s implicate order cxvi, although in a different manner from Bohm‟s pilot wave theory cxvii. Because transactions connect past and future in a time-symmetric way, they cannot be reduced to predictive determinism, because the initial conditions are insufficient to describe the transaction, which also includes quantum boundary conditions coming from the future absorbers. However this future is also unformed in real terms at the early point in time emission takes place. My eye didn‟t even exist, when the quasar I look out at emitted its photon, except as a profoundly unlikely branch of the combined probability „waves‟ of all the events generating parallel „probability universes‟ throughout the history of the universe between the time, long ago, that the quasar released its photon, and me being in the right place, at the right time to see it distant epochs later. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 38 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Fig 12: Wheeler delayed choice experiment (1) shows that a decision can be made after a photon from a distant quasar has traversed a gravitationally lensing galaxy by deciding whether to detect which way the photon traveled or to demonstrate it went both ways by sampling interference. The final state at the absorber thus appears to be able to determine past history of the photon. Quantum erasure (2) likewise enables a distinction already made, which would prevent interference, to be undone after the photon is released. Feynman diagrams (3) show similar time-reversible behavior. In particular time reversed electron scattering (d) is identical to positron creation-annihilation. (4a) In the transactional interpretation, a single photon exchanged between emitter and absorber is formed by constructive interference between a retarded offer wave (solid) and an advanced confirmation wave (dotted). (b) EPR experiments of quantum entanglement involving pairsplitting are resolved by combined offer and confirmation waves, because confirmation waves intersect at the emission point. Contingent absorbers of an emitter in a single passage of a photon (c). Collapse of contingent emitters and absorbers in a transactional matchmaking (d). In the extension of the transactional approach to supercausality cxviii, cxix, a non-linearity collapses the set of contingent possibilities to one offer and confirmation wave, fig 12 (4c,d). Thus at the beginning, we have two sets of contingent emitters and absorbers and at the end each emitter is now exchanging with a specific absorber. Before collapse of the wave function, we have many potential emitters interacting with many potential absorbers. After all the collapses have taken place, each emitter is paired with an absorber. One emitter cannot connect with two absorbers without violating the quantum rules, so there is a frustration between the possibilities, which can only be fully resolved ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 39 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness if emitters and absorbers are linked in pairs. The number of contingent emitters and absorbers are not necessarily equal, but the number of matched pairs is equal to the number of real particles exchanged. This transactional time symmetry is paralleled in the implicit time reversibility of quantum computation, which also depends on a superposition of states. Recent experiments with photosynthesis cxx have shown how quantum computation could play an integral role in biological and hence brain processes. When a photosynthetic active centre absorbs a photon, the wave function of the excitation is able to peform a quantum computation which enables the excitation to travel down the most efficient route to reach the chemical reaction site. The transactional interpretation may thus combine with effective forms of biological quantum computation to produce a space-time anticipating quantum entangled system, which may be pivotal in how the conscious brain does its processing. 8. Consciousness Revealed It is at this point that the influence of the conscious observer and the hard problem become an intriguing challenge to the scientific description. The brain is not a marvelous computer in any classical sense - we can barely manage a seven-digit span, but it is a phenomenally sensitive anticipator of environmental and behavioral change. Subjective consciousness has its survival value in enabling us to jump out of the way when a tiger is about to strike, not so much in computing which path the tiger might be on, (because this is an intractable problem, and the tiger can also take it into account in avoiding the places we would expect it to most likely be), but by intuitive conscious anticipation. Fig 13: Evidence of immediate anticipatory subjective consciousness. A seagull just manages to escape a shark strike, before flying off. The brain, using phase correlation in its own wave dynamics, as a basis for decision-making, parallels the way in which the wave function and its constructive interference determines the probabilities in the reduction of the wave packet. We thus may need to consider the possibility that global brain excitations form an „inflated‟ quantum system and that the brain uses a form of quantum anticipation involving emission and absorption of its own excitations in a way which enables it to ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 40 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness have an „intuitive‟ non-computable representation of future states which complement computational processing and which would be unavailable to a classical computer. Quantum coherence is already a technique in imaging, demonstrating an example of quantum coherence in biological tissues at the molecular level cxxi, cxxii. In this sense, the enigma of subjective consciousness may exist partly because such excitations cannot be reduced to classical prediction, or quantum transactions would introduce a causal „back-tothe-future‟ feedback loop. Thus the brain, in developing the internal model of reality represented by the „Cartesian theatre‟, may have opted for a complementarity between subjective consciousness and objective brain function, to maintain „entangled‟ anticipation, which is an evolutionary adaptation to the transactional relationship underlying wave-particle complementarity, bringing the two complementarities into conjunction. Fig 14: Transactional view of a hunter trying to find a safe path to the waterhole. Both the open hilly path and the jungle path (right) have lions or tigers, which might attack the hunter. Paranoia suggests the hunter takes the hilly path as his quantum anticipation makes him feel uneasy about the forested path, since in the probability universe where he take this path he gets a severe fright. Usually these anticipations will be almost immediate, as in fig 13. In this respect, subjective consciousness may present an existential cosmological situation, as noted in Indian philosophy, in which consciousness is described as „finer‟ than matter, thus gaining a complementary existential status to the physical universe, in the manner of the Tantric dance of Shiva as the undivided field of subjective consciousness and Shakti as maya – the multiplicity of material manifestations, again reflecting the continuous-discrete wave-particle relationship, and do this by manifesting in subjective consciousness aspects of the space-time traversing sub-quantum dynamics that underlies the wave-particle complementarity at the foundation of the quantum ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 41 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness description of the cosmological universe. To make this point in a closing tale we narrate the following descriptive evolutionary account. A hunter is at a fork in the path to the water hole, seeking to get an antelope for meat, but wary of himself getting taken by a big cat in the process. As the man stands pondering and studying the tracks on the path and the sounds and smells blowing across the savannah and through the jungle, his brain develops a resonant coherent excitation – the hunter‟s „stealth‟ – a state of awareness empty of structured thought, anticipating the slightest movement around him. There are two histories of varying duration, from immediate awareness, to the imminent future, that the vagaries of fate on the day could bring about. The man could walk down the shady path or the one over the rocks. As things transpire, there is a hungry tiger on the shady path, which is poised to leap on anything coming its way. However the man‟s brain wave is resonating in an entanglement with his future brain states and there are two parallel universes of future states, one down the shady path and the other down the rocky one. Now the brain state going down the shady path has a catastrophe - one hell of a scare, or outright death, painfully mauled by the big cat. The hunter‟s stalking brain state gets absorbed down there and the absorber's advanced wave runs back through space-time in his brain state along the path he just traversed, to the point where the man is still standing at the fork trying to decide what to do. On the other path he simply walks to the water hole, because the lions are elsewhere today, and shoots a small antelope with his poisoned arrow and takes it back to a woman in the village, so she might consent to have sex with him. This outcome also absorbs the resonating brain wave and sends its advanced wave back to the hunter at the crossroads, but it doesn‟t excite his paranoia. At the crossroads the man is feeling disquiet. His amygdala is giving him conniptions of foreboding. He feels bad about the shade under the trees. He doesn't like the rocky path either, because lions spend a lot of time slouching in the little gullies in the rocky hills, but having already pondered for long enough to contemplate, and being desirous of having sex before the moon sets, he decides, on a sheer hunch, which he can‟t fully describe, to go ahead on the hunt, by walking carefully along the stony path. He ends up having children and his children have too and each have often since felt pretty paranoid about a lot of things, but sometimes they just feel its a sunny day, and the shade under the trees looks cool, and although a few have been picked off by big cats, most of them have taken some good hunks of meat back to the village and had some sex for themselves too. And so the story carries on long enough for the hunter‟s great-grandson to sit down and get ready to share a good roast leg of antelope, while the women throw some sweet potatoes into the fire, to pick up his flute and cock his bowstring against a cooking pot to pluck for a tune, and tell a few jokes, and scary stories too, to get the woman he admires to draw in close and put her arms around him, and do that funny thing of wiggling her middle finger in the palm of his hand that means she wants to take him off for the night for a „walking marriage‟, once the fire has died down low cxxiii. So it is that the anticipatory quantum chaos of the living cell has become the contemplative mind of the lonely hunter, in the generations of conscious beings traversing the sentient wave-particle universe. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 42 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness References: i Rosenthal D. (1986) Two concepts of consciousness Phil. Stud. 49 329-59. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind iii http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness iv Jung, Karl (1963) Memories, Dreams, Reflections Collins and Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. v Ryle, Gilbert (1949, 2000) The Concept of Mind New University of Chicago Press vi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Ryle vii Baars, B. (1997) In the Theatre of Consciousness: Global Workspace Theory, A Rigorous Scientific Theory of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 4/4 292-309 viii Baars, Bernard J. (2001) In the Theater of Consciousness Oxford University Press US, ix Dennett D. C. (1991) Consciousness Explained Little Brown & Co., Boston. x Chalmers, David (1996) The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory Oxford University Press. xi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness xii Crick F, Koch C. (1992) The Problem of Consciousness Sci. Am. Sep. 110-117. xiii Eccles J C (1982) The Initiation of Voluntary Movements by the Supplementary Motor Area Arch Psychiatr Nervenkr 231 423-441. xiv Fried I, Katz A, McCarthy G, Sass K, Williamson P, Spencer S (1991) Functional Organization of Human Supplementary Motor Cortex Studied by Electrical Stimulation The Journal of Neuroscience, 1(11) 3656-3666. xv Haggard P (2005) Conscious intention and motor cognition TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 9/6 290-5. xvi Sergent C, Baillet S, Dehaene S (2005) Timing of the brain events underlying access to consciousness during the attentional blink Nature Neuroscience 8/10 1391-1400. xvii Sigman M, Dehaene S (2005) Parsing a cognitive task: A characterization of the mind’s bottleneck. PLoS Biol 3(2) e37. xviii Dehaene S, Changeux JP (2005) Ongoing spontaneous activity controls access to consciousness: A neuronal model for inattentional blindness. PLoS Biol 3(5) e141. xix Sigman M, Dehaene S (2006) Dynamics of the central bottleneck: Dual-task and task uncertainty. PLoS Biol 4(7) e220. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040220 xx Del Cul A, Baillet S, Dehaene S (2007) Brain dynamics underlying the nonlinear threshold for access to consciousness. PLoS Biol 5(10) e260. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050260 xxi Del Cul A, Dehaene S, Reyes P, Bravo E, Slachevsky A (2009) Causal role of prefrontal cortex in the threshold for access to consciousness Brain 132 2531–2540. xxii Gaillard R, Dehaene S, Adam C, Cle´menceau S, Hasboun D, et al. (2009) Converging intracranial markers of conscious access. PLoS Biol 7(3) e1000061. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1000061 xxiii Reuter F et. al. (2009) White matter damage impairs access to consciousness in multiple sclerosis NeuroImage 44 590-599. xxiv Schnakers C (2009) Detecting consciousness in a total locked-in syndrome: An active event-related paradigm Neurocase 15/4 271-7. xxv Quiroga R, Mukamel R, Isham E, Malach R, Fried I (2008) Human single-neuron responses at the threshold of conscious recognition PNAS 105/9 3599-3604. xxvi Ananthaswamy A (2010) Firing on all neurons: Where consciousness comes from New Scientist 22 March. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527520.400-firing-on-all-neurons-where-consciousness-comesfrom.html xxvii Ananthaswamy A (2009) 'Consciousness signature' discovered spanning the brain New Scientist 17 March. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16775-consciousness-signature-discovered-spanning-thebrain.html xxviii Ananthaswamy A (2009) Whole brain is in the grip of consciousness New Scientist 18 March. http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20127004.300-whole-brain-is-in-the-grip-of-consciousness.html xxix Fox D (2008) The secret life of the brain New Scientist 5 Nov. xxx Vanhaudenhuyse A et. al. (2010) Default network connectivity reflects the level of consciousness in non-communicative brain-damaged patients Brain 133 161-71. xxxi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laplace's_demon xxxii Eddington, Arthur (1939) Philosophy of Physical Science Cambridge University Press. xxxiii King C C (1991) Fractal and Chaotic Dynamics in Nervous Systems Progress in Neurobiology 36 279-308 xxxiv Skarda C.J., Freeman W.J., (1987), How brains make chaos in order to make sense of the world, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10 161-195. xxxv Freeman, W. (1991). The physiology of perception. Sci. Am. 264 Feb 35-41. xxxvi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Norton_Lorenz xxxvii http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_H._Pribram xxxviii Pribram, K Ed. (1993) Rethinking neural networks : quantum fields and biological data Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J. xxxix http://www.math.auckland.ac.nz/~king/745/CircleMaps.pdf xl Jung-Beeman, Mark (2008) The Eureka Hunt New Yorker July 28 84/22 40. xli http://cas.bellarmine.edu/tietjen/images/new_page_2.htm xlii Ramachandran, V. S. (1998) God and the temporal Lobes of the Brain A talk given as part of the program Human Selves and Transcendental Experiences: A Dialogue of Science and Religion Presented at U.C. San Diego, January 31, 1998. ii ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 43 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness xliii Hamer, Dean 2004 The God Gene: How Faith Is Hard-Wired Into Our Genes Random House. Norenzayan, Ara et. al. (2008) The Origin and Evolution of Religious Prosociality Science 322 58. xlv Liljenström Hans, Svedin Uno (2005) Micro-Meso-Macro: Addressing Complex Systems Couplings Imperial College Press. xlvi Molnar, G et. al. (2008) Complex Events Initiated by Individual Spikes in the Human Cerebral Cortex PLOS Biology 6/9 222. xlvii Woodruff, A and Yuste R 2008 Of Mice and Men, and Chandeliers PLOS Biology 6/9 243 xlviii http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ising_model xlix Mishlove G, Pribran K (1998) The Holographic Brain http://twm.co.nz/pribram.htm l Basar E., Basar-Eroglu J., Röschke J., Schütt A., (1989), The EEG is a quasi-deterministic signal anticipating sensory-cognitive tasks, in Basar E., Bullock T.H. eds. Brain Dynamics Springer-Verlag, 43-71. li Hoke M., Lehnertz K., Pantev C., Lütkenhöner B., (1989), Spatiotemporal aspects of synergetic processes in the auditory cortex as revealed by the magnetoencephalogram, in Basar E., Bullock T.H. eds. Brain Dynamics, Springer-Verlag , 84108. lii Robson, D (2009) Disorderly genius: How chaos drives the brain New Scientist 29 Jun http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20227141.200-disorderly-genius-how-chaos-drives-the-brain.html?full=true liii Beggs J, Plenz D (2003) Neuronal Avalanches in Neocortical Circuits Journal of Neuroscience, 23, 11167-77. liv Beggs J, Plenz D (2004) Neuronal Avalanches Are Diverse and Precise Activity Patterns That Are Stable for Many Hours in Cortical Slice Cultures Journal of Neuroscience, 24, 5216-9. lv Kitzbichler M, Smith M, Christensen S, Bullmore E (2009) Broadband Criticality of Human Brain Network Synchronization PLoS Computational Biology, 5, e1000314. lvi Bassett D, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Achard S, Duke T, Bullmore E (2006) Adaptive reconfiguration of fractal small-world human brain functional networks Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103, 19518 lvii Achard s, Bullmore E (2007) Efficiency and Cost of Economical Brain Functional Networks PLoS Computational Biology, 3, e17. lviii Thatcher R, North D, Biver C (208) Intelligence and EEG phase reset: A two compartmental model of phase shift and lock NeuroImage, 42, 1639. lix King C (2007) Sensory Transduction and Subjective Experience Nature Preceedings 31st Dec 2007 http://www.dhushara.com/enigma/enigma.htm lx Cifra M, Fields J, Farhadi A (2010) Electromagnetic cellular interactions Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology doi:10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2010.07.003 lxi Rahnama M, Bókkon I, Tuszynski J, Cifra M, Sardar P, Salari V (2010) Emission of Biophotons and Neural Activity of the Brain http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.3371 lxii Bókkon I, Salari V, Tuszynski J, Antal I 2010 Estimation of the number of biophotons involved in the visual perception of a single-object image: Biophoton intensity can be considerably higher inside cells than outside http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.3371 lxiii http://www.brain-map.org/ lxiv http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete lxv Zurek W. (1991) Decoherence and the Transition from Quantum to Classical Physics Today Oct. lxvi Alisa Bokulich (2008) Can Classical Structures Explain Quantum Phenomena? Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 59 217–235 lxvii Gutzwiller, M.C. (1992). Quantum Chaos. Scientific American 266 78 - 84. lxviii Heller E, Tomsovic S (1993) Postmodern Quantum Mechanics Physics Today July 38-46. lxix http://www.aip.org/png/html/corral.htm lxx Moore F, Robinson J, Bharucha C, Sundaram B, Raizen M, (1995) Atom optics realization of the quantum δ-kicked rotor Physical Review Letters 75/25 4598-4601. lxxi Raizen M, Moore F, Robinson J, Bharucha C and Sundaram B (1996) An experimental realization of the quantum δkicked rotor Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 8 687–692. lxxii Berry, M (1989) Quantum physics on the edge of chaos New Scientist 29 Oct http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/edgechaos.html lxxiii Wilkinson P, Fromhold T, Eaves L, Sheard F, Miura N Takamasu T (1996) Observations of 'scarred' wavefunctions in a quantum well with chaotic electron dynamics Nature 380 608-610. lxxiv Monteiro T, Delande D, Connerade J (1997) Have quantum scars been observed? [+reply] Nature 387 863-864. lxxv King C C (1989) Dual-Time Supercausality Physics Essays 2/2 128-151 lxxvi http://www.dhushara.com/book/quantcos/qchao/quantc.htm lxxvii Chaudhury S, Smith A, Anderson B, Ghose S, Jessen P (2009) Quantum signatures of chaos in a kicked top Nature 461 768-771 lxxviii Steck D (2009) Passage through chaos Nature 461 736-7. lxxix Mackie G (1990) The Elementary Nervous System Revisited American Zoologist, 30/4 907-920 lxxx Chay T, Rinzel J (1985) Bursting, beating and chaos in an excitable membrane model Biophys. J. 47 357-366. lxxxi Hayashi H, Nakao M, Hirakawa K (1982) Chaos in the self-sustained oscillation of an excitable biological membrane under sinusoidal stimulation Physics Letters A 88/5 265-266. lxxxii Lledo P (1997) Exocytosis in excitable cells: a conserved molecular machinery from yeast to neuron European Journal of Endocrinology (1997) 137 1–9. lxxxiii Bingley M (1966) Membrane potential in Amoeba proteus J. Exp. Biol., 45, 251-267. lxxxiv Bruce D, Marshall J (1965) Some Ionic and Bioelectric Properties of the Ameba Chaos chaos The Journal of General xliv ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 44 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research | January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 013-044 King, C. Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Physiology September 1, 151-178. lxxxv Tasaki I, Kamiya N A Study on Electrophysiological Properties of Carnivorous Amoebae Journal of Cellular and Comparative Physiology 63/3 365-380. lxxxvi Rice N (1945) Pelomyxa Carolinensis (Wilson) or Chaos Chaos (Linnaeus) Biological Bulletin 88/2 139-143 http://www.jstor.org/pss/1538041 lxxxvii Kung C, Eckert R (1972) Genetic Modification of Electric Properties in an Excitable Membrane Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 69/1 93-97. lxxxviii Hennessey T (2005) Responses of the ciliates Tetrahymena and Paramecium to external ATP and GTP Purinergic Signalling 1 101–110. lxxxix Onimaru H, Ohki, K, Nozawa, Y Naitoh Y (1980) Electrical Properties of Tetrahymena, a Suitable Tool for Studies on Membrane Excitation Proc. Japan Acad. 56 Ser. B 538-543. xc Halloy J, Lauzeral J, and Goldbeter A (1998) Modeling oscillations and waves of cAMP in Dictyostelium discoideum cells. Biophys Chem 72 9-19. xci Goldbeter A (2006) Oscillations and waves of cyclic AMP in Dictyostelium: A prototype for spatio-temporal organization and pulsatile intercellular communication. Bull Math Biol 68 1095-1109. xcii Brizzi G, Blum J (1970) Effect of Growth Conditions on Serotonin Content of Tetrahymena pyriformis Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology (J. Protozool.) 17/4 553-555. xciii Essman E (1987) The serotonergic system in Tetrahymena pyriformis International Journal of Clinical & Laboratory Research 17/1 77-82. xciv Janakidevi K, Dewey V, Kidder G (1966) Serotonin in protozoa Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 113 758-9. xcv Takeda N, Sugiyama K. (1993) Metabolism of biogenic monoamines in the ciliated protozoan, Tetrahymena pyriformis Comparative biochemistry and physiology. 106/1 63-70. xcvi Nomura T. et. al. (1998) Enzymes related to catecholamine biosynthesis in Tetrahymena pyriformis. Presence of GTP cyclohydrolase I. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology -- Part B: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 120/4 753-760. xcvii Köhidai L. ; Vakkuri O. ; Keresztesi M. ; Leppäluoto J. ; Csaba G. ; (2003) Induction of melatonin synthesis in Tetrahymena pyriformis by hormonal imprinting: a unicellular "factory" of the indoleamine Cellular and molecular biology 49/4 521-524. xcviii Nakagaki T, Yamada H, Tóth Á (2000) Maze-solving by an amoeboid organism Nature 407 470. xcix Ball, P (2008) Cellular memory hints at the origins of intelligence Nature News 451 24 January 2008. c King C (1978), Unified field theories and the origin of life Univ. Auck. Math. Rept. Ser. 134. ci King C (1990) Did membrane electrochemistry precede translation? Origins of Life Evol. Biosph. 20 15. cii King C (2004) Cosmic Symmetry-breaking, Bifurcation, Fractality and Biogenesis Neuroquantology 3 149-185. ciii http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia civ King C.C. (1991) Fractal and Chaotic Dynamics in the Brain Prog. Neurobiol. 36 279-308. cv Basar, E., Basar-Eroglu, J., Röschke, J., and Schütt, A. (1989) The EEG is a quasi-deterministic signal anticipating sensory-cognitive tasks In Basar E., Bullock T.H. (Eds.) Brain dynamics (pp 43-71). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. cvi Llinás R. (1987) in Blakemore C., Greenfield S., Mindwaves Basil Blackwell, Oxford. cvii MacLean, P. (1991). Neofrontocerebellar evolution in regard to computation and prediction: Some fractal aspects of microgenesis. In R. Hanlon (Ed.), Cognitive microgenesis : A new psychological perspective 3-33 New York: SpringerVerlag. cviii Feynman R.P. (1961) Quantum Electrodynamics W.A. Benjamin, N.Y. cix Davies, P.C.W. (1974) The Physics of Time Asymmetry Surrey Univ. Press. cx Horgan J (1992) Quantum Philosophy Scientific American July http://www.dhushara.com/book/quantcos/qphil/qphil.htm cxi Cramer J.G., (1986) The transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics Rev. Mod. Phys. 58 647-687. cxii Clauser J.F., Shimony A. (1978) Rep. Prog. Phys. 41, 1881. cxiii Bell J.S. (1966) Rev. Mod. Phys. 38/3, 447. cxiv Aspect A., Grangier P., Roger G. (1982) Phys. Rev. Lett. 49, 91, 1804. cxv Cramer J.G. (1983) Found. Phys. 13, 887. cxvi Bohm D. (1980) Wholeness and the implicate order Boston and Henley, London Routeledge & Kegan Paul. cxvii Bohm D. (1952) A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of ‘hidden’ variables I & II Phys. Rev. 85 166-93. cxviii King C (1989) Dual-time supercausality Phys. Essays 2, 128 - 151. cxix King C (2006) Quantum Cosmology and the Hard Problem of the Conscious Brain in The Emerging Physics of Consciousness Springer (Ed.) Jack Tuszynski 407-456. cxx McAlpine K (2010) Nature's hot green quantum computers revealed New Scientist 3 February http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527464.000-natures-hot-green-quantum-computersrevealed.html cxxi Samuel E. (2001) Seeing the seeds of cancer New Scientist 24 Mar 42-45. cxxii Warren W. (1998) MR Imaging contrast enhancement based on intermolecular zero quantum coherences Science 281 247. cxxiii Fielder C and King C (2004) Sexual Paradox : Complementarity, Reproductive Conflict and Human Emergence ISBN: 1-4116-5532-X http://www.sexualparadox.org ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

429 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality Article The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality Stephen P. Smith* ABSTRACT The proclivities of particularity and generality describe a polarity, held together by a naked emotionality that signifies a felt middle-term. This polarity indicates a type of circular reasoning, and can endlessly oscillate due to an equivocation that confuses particularity with generality that may block emotional energies and prevent resolution. Deduction and induction represent the same polarity, as does the frequentist and Bayesian interpretations of statistics. Reintroducing emotion back into logic returns an intuitionist logic and grammar, and this permits the resolution of felt tension. This intuitionism is tied to a time-sense that oscillates between foresight (to particularity) and hindsight (to generality). Emotionality is found relating to causation, agreeing with A.N. Whitehead. It is hypothesized that the intuitionist logic provides a universal grammar, or a vitalistic organizing principle, that has impacted on biological evolution. This agrees with panpsychism and panentheism. Key Words: abduction, Bayesian, causation, deduction, frequentist, generality, induction, intuitionism, objectivism, particularity, time, universal grammar. 1. Introduction Ayn Rand`s objectivism presented itself as a clean grammar and logic built upon sense-certain facts and tight logic. Deduction, induction, and concept-formation are all that is thought needed to acquire objective knowledge (see Rand 1990). The grammar and logic is only thought clean of the burden of emotion if cold rigor is strictly enforced. Subjectivity is removed from a picture of objective reality that is thought empty of mind and emotion. Meanwhile, emotion is free to seek its own rewards by exploiting what is seen only to be objective reality, creating a painful contradiction. Rand`s “concept-formation” is to first differentiate (or particularize) a set into units and then to integrate (or generalize) over the set. Rand (1990, page 28) limits concepts to a polarity and writes: “The process of observing the facts of reality and of integrating them into concepts is, in essence, a process of induction. The process of subsuming new instances under a known concept is, in essence, a process of deduction.” Rand correctly connects induction and deduction with the proclivities of generality and particularity, respectively, but in doing this she turns concept-formation into a polarity that holds nothing else but induction and deduction. Therefore, concept-formation is only a weaker alternative to hypothesisformation, or what Charles Saunders Peirce calls “abduction.” Abduction is neither induction or deduction, but a third category. Peirce`s abduction turned hypothesis, or theory, may eventually become an improved induction. For this development to be successful, however, there must be testing, revision, or retraction, and all this might involve statistical analysis and hypothesis testing. Error recognition is essential, and for example if emotion is removed from logic then there is no way to recognize the hurt caused by misplacing emotion. Rand`s concept-formation won`t help if there is no way to see and feel mistakes. Correspondence: Stephen P. Smith, Ph.D., Visiting Scientist, U.C. Davis Physics Department, Davis, California. Moderator and list owner of: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/serenityandtolerance/ E-mail: hucklebird@aol.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 430 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality In this paper, the key mistake of objectivism is corrected thereby returning emotion to logic and grammar. It will be observed that abduction will involve a person`s emotions. Moreover, the dynamic of deduction with induction will be shown to involve an emotional interplay. Emotion is found sourcing the middle-term that holds Rand`s polar concepts together. Emotion and mind cannot be removed from greater reality to leave an objective reality that is clean for study. Wallace (2000) finds room to study subjectivity in a way that is free of the presumption of objectivity. A presumed objectivity is illusory. Assuming meaning and truth are sought, Edmund Husserl (1970) noted that a presumed objectivity must be replaced with a transcendental subjectivity. I will agree with Husserl, using an intuitionist analysis of logic and grammar. The time sense that is found fundamental to L.E.J. Brouwer`s mathematical intuitionism will also reappear in my analysis. Statistical methods relate very much to our capacity for error recognition, and so statistics is a subject worthy of a closer look. In Section 2, the philosophy of statistics is presented to cover both Bayesian and frequentist interpretations. In Section 3, these two outlooks will be tied to inductive and deductive logics, respectively. It will be noted that the tendency to seek particularity is tied to deduction, and the tendency to seek generality is tied to induction (agreeing with Rand). Like the Bayesian and the frequentist, induction and deduction will be shown to involve reciprocity. Particularity and generality will also show reciprocity, and the two will be shown held together by an emotive middle-term that cannot be excluded by reason. The expunging of emotion from reason as prescribed by Rand`s objectivism is committing the fallacy of excluded middle. A two-sided time sense is hinted by a foresight that seeks particularity and a hindsight that seeks generality. Time as an intuitionist fundamental is investigated in Section 4. Causation must also be reissued and this is done in Section 5, where it is noted that intuitionism transforms into vitalism. The interplay of particularity and generality are connected to Kant`s third antinomy in Section 6, where a universal grammar (or an organizing principle) is hypothesized. This last step takes logic and grammar, and turns them into a panpsychism and panentheism where mind is part of the universe. 2. Bayesian and Frequentist The praxis of statistics is an application of probability theory. Probability has to do with assigning measure to a sample-space; see Pierre-Simon Laplace`s A Philosophical Essay On Probabilities. Because of this dependence a presumed “randomness” cannot be taken as a fundamental property in the universe, and Laplace might possibly agree if only because his determinist ontology only recognized knowledge and ignorance while leaving nothing to chance. Randomness is found emerging from an a-priori structure provided by the sample-space, albeit by design (e.g., the rolling of dice), or by deterministic chaos (e.g., the butterfly effect), or by Laplace`s ignorance. Quantum uncertainty may also reveal a presumed randomness, but this uncertainty is non-classical and quantum mechanics is already strongly suggestive of polarity representing the extremes of particularity (the collapse of the wave-function upon measurement) and generality (the evolution of the deterministic wave-function). In any regard, “possibility” does not convey the same meaning as “probability,” and therefore, statistical methods (when used correctly) are only tools and are not intended to signify a rigid ontology. The methods of statistics help reveal errors (that depart from a model), and also help to summarize knowledge (under an assumed a model), and so statistical application is dependent on the context offered by a nominated model. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 431 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality Debate can rage on what is a “good” model, but even prior to this argument the notion of randomness is already found bifurcated (depending on our inclination to recognize errors or to summarize knowledge). Within the field of statistics, and within the sciences where statistics is applied, there is the ongoing battle between the frequentist and Bayesian interpretations of statistics. My observation is that both horns of the bifurcation are represented by this battle. Bayesian statistics is marked by belief functions turned into probability distributions. These functions are called "priors," and because we are talking about "belief" the functions may be called "subjective priors." That is, human subjectivity finds its way into a functional representation. These packages of information combine with actual observations (that associate with a likelihood function) to provide an information set that is now transformed by Bayes theorem; as originally formulated in An Essay Toward Solving a Problem in the Doctrine of Chance by Reverend Thomas Bayes. The output is a neatly summarized probability distribution for a parameter set that is conditional on the observed data and including all a-priori beliefs. The idea is that the statistician is interested in the statistical distribution of the parameter set, which includes such quantities like the mean and variance, because these parameters impact directly on typical statistical inferences. Subjectivity enters the Bayesian analysis not only by model specification and subjective priors. In Bayesian decision theory there are also utility functions which are meant to express the utilitarian value of a set of decisions given the possibility of statistical outcomes (that may or may not be anticipated by the decision maker). The utility function can only be specified subjectivity, and the utility function is then found reflecting the risk tolerance of the decision maker. The frequentist is marked by skepticism of Bayesian statistics. The frequentist attempts to deduce statistical distributions from a sampling scheme that is fully declared. For example, the frequentist will deduce the sample distribution for a set of statistics (e.g., the sample mean) by pretending to repeat the survey an infinite number of times. That is, if I calculate the sample mean in each of one million (or more) do-overs of a survey, then I will expect to see some statistical variation from sample to sample. You would think that one survey is enough, but the frequentist must follow this deduction even when there is really only one survey to be conducted. Moreover, the frequentists have perfected their trade to the point that the do-overs may be imagined in finite populations or in infinite populations, and with replacement of samples or without replacement of samples. The Bayesians and the frequentists are found conflicted. Each pretends to hold the high ground of statistical purity, but in reality each is loyal to a particular brand of statistics and the two brands are found contradicted when each is pushed to an extreme that excludes the other. This hints of a genuine reciprocity, in my view. The Bayesian will note that the frequentist has imagined a repetitive sampling that does not occur because in practice only one sample is usually collected. Even in a sequential-sampling experimental design, the Bayesian will note that statistical evaluation comes ex post facto, and planning need only anticipate this reality. Moreover, the Bayesian will complain that the frequentist has imagined a sampling scheme that is found incoherent; meaning that the statistician is only interested in statistical errors that have to do with a parameter set that corresponds to a realized set of observations, and the statistician is less interested in hypothetical observations that are never realized. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 432 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality The frequentist will fire back that the Bayesian approach lacks "objectivity," and that "Bayesians are found introducing their own subjectivity into their statistical inferences." The response comes that at least the Bayesian declares his (or her) subjectivity, whereas the frequentist only pretends to expunge subjectivity. The Bayesian notes that frequentist subjectivity remains in the form of an incoherence, a mere pretense, a mess and obfuscation of sampling arguments. "Besides," the Bayesian says, "we have improper priors that reflect our state of ignorance and this is as close to true objectivity that we can get." "Ah," the frequentist counters, "you only have improper priors for a few cases where full ignorance is admitted, you don`t have a prior probability for all the cases that you are ignorant of." Up to this point the Bayesian was winning the argument, and the Bayesian is pushed off balance with this last remark. Nevertheless, the Bayesian responds: "your sampling scheme only obfuscates your statistical analysis, and this leads to a needless complexity that can become intractable in the worst case." The frequentist argues back: "you call my analysis complicated, yours is complicated by the mere fact that you remain unable to declare the pure state of ignorance that can be applied in all cases." At this point I must intervene, and stop an argument that can become heated. The frequentist approach of repetitive sampling is important, but not as a stand alone statistical dogma. The doubting frequentists, along with the doubting deduction (as we will see), is found holding inductive thinking in check. Therefore, the right application for frequentist statistics is for the purpose of quality control, and in checking the methodology of statistical thinking that is highly inductive. If an inductive analysis is false, the frequentist is up for the job of refuting the wayward induction by using a deduction that follows from repetitive sampling; this is called sensitivity analysis. Inductive thinking reaches its high point in Bayesian statistics. The hopeful induction is married to its brand name: that the sun will rise tomorrow because that is what the sun has always done; that we act by hopeful dictates that emerge from subjective probability and utility; that the Bayesian inference is "optimal" and uses all the information given by prior knowledge and historical data. The problem is that inductive thinking by itself cannot describe all of reality. Bayesians need frequentists to expose their glaring error of the heart. There is a hint of a possible resolution of this conflict that demonstrates the apparent soundness of an intuitionist interpretation of statistics. 3. Deduction and Induction By “deduction” I mean a logical chain that starts with propositions, even presuppositions, and ends with a conclusion. Deduction flows from the general to the particular. Moreover, I speculate that any logical chain must necessarily permit time passage, otherwise awareness of the chain is not possible within the intuitionist paradigm. Because the conclusion following from the presuppositions indicates time passage, a deterministic mechanism may likewise represent a clock`s ability to keep time. A logical chain that is conclusive mimics determinism, with no remainder. Therefore, deduction is the ability to recognize deterministic chains, and deterministic chains are described as a one-way flow of cause-and-effect that parrots awareness thereby revealing a declared determinism. The awareness of deduction is the awareness of one-pointed causation that comes with time passage. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 433 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality Deduction is necessarily provisional, because the presuppositions must be nominated and their truth, or falsity, must be known by something other than by deduction. That is, a deduction can be declared universal only in the sense that the conclusion follows faithfully from the presuppositions, not that the presuppositions are true. It is inductive logic that comes into play when presuppositions are evaluated; e.g., that the sun will rise tomorrow because sunrises have always occurred in our history. Induction flows from the particular back to the general. Moreover, deduction`s ability to recognize deterministic chains implies a middle-term that is excluded from deduction, but it is this middle-term that permits said recognition. Therefore, I speculate that when the middle-term is recognized then the grounding inductions are reasserted as truth. Deduction is supported by its induction, revealing a type of circular reasoning. The deductive-inductive circuit is held together by naked emotionality that becomes self-evident when the faithful are asked to explain their circularity that may be blocked. Imperfect deduction only finds a false induction and will endlessly repeat itself, thereby revealing an emotional tension that is blocked and held tight by equivocation. The unblocked circuit can find within itself an ability to resolve tension, where particularity is now distinguished from generality. Like deduction and the mechanism of clocks, time also leaves an impact of induction. For what is induction but the awareness of time that underwrites apparent causation and the reappearing habits that become anticipated? The number of sunrises becomes a habit, dully anticipated by a rooster that faithfully marks the dawn with a "coco doodle doo." What is induction but the attempt to make a caricature of time history, and to build a Bayesian posterior distribution that can summarize the recent past? Oddly, the question of time is now found impacting on both statistics and induction. Clearly, a distribution that describes frequency can agree with our sensibility given a time passage that supports inductive hindsight. However, Frequentists attempt to deduce the sampling distributions on a firm deterministic foundation, like rolling a dice thereby showing that probability is firmly established (in fact determined): enter the sample-survey with prescribed statistical properties. The frequentist is marked by this abstract deductive thinking that anticipates future events, e.g., he or she will deduce the sample distributions from a rigid protocol that follows an imagined repetition of data collection (noted in Section 2). The frequentist then declares a probable foresight that works to stifle hindsight. The frequentist program is opposed to the Bayesian school that is founded more on induction; i.e., deductive foresight is opposed to inductive hindsight. A continuos sample space is infinite, with each occurrence coming with an infinitesimal probability. This would turn the infinite universe into a strawman that is well caricatured by probability theory, and this invention is hardly worthy of religious notice. The rare event must also occur with the benefit of hindsight (i.e., coming with a-priori knowledge), otherwise even the frequentist statistician will declare it nonsignificant. The abstract frequentist remains disconnected from concrete reality, unless there is a-priori knowledge that comes as an induction and can be specified by Bayesian accounting. The statistician starting as a frequentist now comes full circle and becomes a Bayesian. Nevertheless, what is anticipated by the habits of time-history is found conflicted by a determinism that remains unable to ground its presuppositions. Correlation does not imply causation, and the conflict between Bayesian and frequentist may remain unresolved at a deeper level. What grounds deduction`s presuppositions must be none other than a self-evidence revealed by timepassage and that reconnects with inductive frequency and causation. Otherwise, one-pointed deduction will remain conflicted with its own wayward induction, until the riddle is solved. My guess is that it`s the ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 434 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality “journey” that tunes deduction to its none-wayward induction where correlation implies a causation that reattaches to authentic emotion. However, the journey is not the conclusion at the end of a long chain of determinism, as a one-pointed deduction will have it. The drive that seeks plurality can be teamed with deductive thinking (or even frequentist) that seeks freedom from an overbearing induction (or hypothesis). For the purpose of hypothesis testing, R.A. Fisher (in Statistical Methods and Scientific Inference) recommends the possible actions of rejecting the null hypothesis or failing to reject the null hypothesis, but never accepting it. Fisher was a frequentist. Defeating this tired induction (the null hypothesis) brings an end to the older time cycle, and permits rebirth among the plurality. Nevertheless, for the new voice to prevail it must repeat itself too, while inventing its own heart-beat with repeated patterns that can be recognized through the inductive proclivity; and this is despite the offering of infinite plurality that may conceal the new voice. Deduction defeats its wayward induction by stipulating a counterfactual that ask “what if?” The generality offered by induction should include all cases, even those particulars that are found inside the counterfactual. Nevertheless, through “trickery” the counterfactual is found contrived to contradict the induction. The doubting deduction is found working in the negative, to bring on a catharsis that will free induction from its hopefulness. The purgation comes with a run to freedom. Nevertheless, the run to freedom is only temporary, because sensibility eventually returns. The old induction heals itself, and returns changed by a process of reinvention by Peirce`s “abduction.” The desire to run ends when a transcendent desire is recognized as source, coincident with the archetypical threeness given by induction, deduction, and abduction. Time must permit these two passages: both deductive cause-and-effect tending to one-pointedness; and the inductive heart-beat of renewed patterns that may give themselves over to habit. Note that irritability and one-pointedness cannot end with narrow deduction that is forever exalted, because it points only to escape by Karl Popper`s (1965, Chapter 11) refutation of induction with an eventual return to the euphoric habit and drum beat (its opposite). Like Hume, Popper was a deductivist (see Stove 1998, Chapter 3). It`s the journey. Time polarizes itself into deductive causation and inductive habit, or into the proclivities of particularity versus generality, or into doubt and hopefulness (for lack of better words). Or time polarizes to indicate Brouwer`s first act of intuition (fragmentation by two-ity) and his second act of intuition (generation of new forms); see Van Atten, 2004, Chapter 1. What holds the polarity together is a middle-term that is found beyond our one-sided words that are hung-up on either hopefulness or doubtful strife. The archetypical threeness is as far as we can go, assuming our discussion is limited to mere words. Both time and causation remain important, and must be explored. 4. Time To experience time, awareness of frequency becomes essential: the ticks of a clock; the repeating heart beat and tuning. Parmenidies`s timeless vantage point can, in theory, observe change that sees frequency. Heraclitus immersed his vantage point in the flux of becoming, and still recognized unity in opposites. That which is unmoved must necessarily reside in the middle-term that holds Heraclitus`s Logos together, and this ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 435 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality provides one way to resolve the conflicted views offered by Parmenidies and Heraclitus. Otherwise, the views of Parmenidies and Haraclitus have strangely polarized, each describing two aspects of time: as Heraclitus`s change and Parmenidies`s foundation that rest unchanged. The two aspects again come with an emotive middle-term (the felt precondition), given that Parmenidies and Haraclitus may never find agreement beyond a heated argument. Nevertheless, the two aspects, and the felt middle-term, return to the unchanged emotion that gives witness to the vast plurality. The archetype reappears (the Logos), where Heraclitus is found agreeing with Parmenidies. But note that the question of time escapes through the middle-term. Time can be thought of as a uniform pattern of ticks, each tick of uniform duration. This simplistic view is misleading because there is no way to judge what is uniform and unchanging in absolute terms. A clock looks to have uniform ticks only because there must be a master clock to which all comparisons can be made. For example, each tick from one clock looks uniform because the ticks all correspond to one second on the master clock. If the master clock had uneven ticks, then the lesser clock may look to exhibit irregular ticks by comparison. But we could not observe the uneven ticks in the master clock, they would still look even because the master clock can only be compared with itself. The question of time is found slipping away. Perhaps time can be objectively and safely measured by the distance traveled by light? No! Such a distance can only be measured by the duration required for light passage. Duration and distance are hopelessly intertwined. We can attempt to measure distance by lesser than light speed activity, for example, by the laying of a ruler end to end. Nevertheless, this activity requires time for intuitionist construction (an energetic expression). There can be no guarantee that this distance is separate from time, i.e., by defining time in terms other than by referring back to time. At this point we might leap to the conclusion that time is an illusion, while pointing to special relativity. But if two past light cones overlap, the overlap region will show time ordered events that won`t change despite possible time dilation. There was never any way to judge a clock`s ticks to be uniform without referring to a master clock, and so time dilation is not the magic bullet that will bring time to its death. General relativity may be considered, and abstraction on abstraction can be built into the Gödel universe to formalize time. The conclusion may come that time is not real because time travel is impossible (see Yourgrau 2006). Nevertheless, building the Gödel universe is an intuitionist construction that requires time, and what is demonstrated is only that time can`t be formalized. Gödel fell for his own selfreference! The laws that went into the formality are only one-sided abstractions (not the two-sided synthetics that they are, as we will see) that have somehow exalted themselves into Plato`s world of ideal forms, even over Parmenidies and Haraclitus`s agreement, even over the unchanging emotion. And if time is an illusion, what are we to make of space? Einstein felt that time and space are unified, so we must also leap to the conclusion that space is an illusion too. And all the action principles that make up the laws of nature come as space-time equations, so these actions must also be illusions. This would be the complete denial of everything self-evident, to be followed by a hopeless fall into solipsism. What is self-evident is that time polarizes space, and events show themselves through actions that are two-sided. There are three crude spatial dimensions, and these are sufficient for the self-recognition that shows itself in Parmenidies and Haraclitus`s agreement; I treat this subject elsewhere, see Smith (2009). This is a non-dual recognition, but the question of time slips away through the middle-term again. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 436 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality Time is completely confounded with Spirit, and so it must be that time is two-sided too. Therefore, an analysis of time may bifurcate, to indicate a psychological preference or a preferred method of analysis. The irony extends even to the subject of statistics, and beyond the Bayesian and frequentist interpretations (noted in Section 2), in that the statistical analysis of time series is also found coming in two flavors: (1) The time-domain analysis is marked by one-pointed unfolding that is otherwise deduced and resembles a Markov chain; (2) The frequency-domain analysis returns the time series to a periodic pattern that may be correlated with an infinite basis representing waveforms, where a periodic signal may repeat to support induction. 5. Causation And what are we to make of this sentient precondition that predates thinking? A.N. Whitehead (1969, Chapter VII) believed that emotion is the primitive we are now looking for, and that it is this primitive that connects with causation. We might turn to science to attempt an answer to this question. To experiment is to control and setup a precondition to be watched. This is the act of sending. To record the observations that follow is the act of receiving. Therefore, science must act only in the confines of sending and receiving, and the synthesis of sending and receiving now defines information. But as in any synthesis, the middle-term that holds the sender to its receiver is now undeclared, and undefined. So much for science! But wait! The laws of nature are sometimes declared fundamental; in error in my view. But what are these socalled fundamentals? They are actions that operate upon a symmetry, and as such they are also restricted by the activity of sending and receiving. The laws are time symmetric, and hence the actions are twosided! The asymmetrical second law would seem to be a glaring exception to fact that all laws are restricted by synthetical nature of sending and receiving. But if this law is presented as a universal derived from statistical interactions, then this derivation fails. Such an attempt meets only a fatal equivocation: that which is represented by statistical mechanics is intended to be equal to that which recognizes order and dissipates heat. To represent is to send, to recognize is to receive. The second law is equally twosided, and is unable to escape the limits in place that are given by the activity of sending and receiving. The middle-term is always beyond laws that are declared fundamental. This is enough of the rehash of my take on laws. Where did this talk of causation come from? Answer: Aristotle! It was Aristotle that introduced material, formal, efficient, and final causes. However, David Hume (in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding) noted that our understanding of causation did not follow from reason, but depended upon experience. In other words, our understanding of causation did not come from science or philosophy, but from something other! It is only that causation can be better vetted in philosophy, than science. And indeed, what is found fundamental in science is not a oneway causation, and this must have been something that Whitehead appreciated. This has not stopped scientists from injecting Aristotle`s understanding of efficient causation into science. This has unfolded naturally from the engineering imperative that gave us combustion engines, clocks, and conveyor belts, etc. However, much to the horror of some scientists, a one-sided understanding of efficient causation cannot be taken as fundamental. And so much of what is called science depends on this one-sided interpretation that is now found outside of the synthesis of sending and receiving. You see this over-extension when statistical mechanics is thought to explain the arrow of time. You see this overextension in evolutionary psychology, where human behavior is said caused by natural selection. You see ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 437 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality it in complexity theory (e.g., our climate models) where tacit acceptance of efficient causation is enforced by way of computer simulation. System thinking, as it is called, is all about the one-way flow of causeand-effect. It is a surface feature hung-up on multitasking (Hegel`s being), all breadth and no depth (no becoming). It is all space and no time. Its all reaping, but no sowing: a one-sided Yang bashing in the name of political correctness. So there you have it. One-way causation, or efficient causation, cannot be taken as fundamental (i.e., alone, or by itself). And if we grant Hegel`s Notion that guides the dialectic, then an apparent causation must also meet a reception that carries teleology (reverse-time causation that hides behind, and gives its support to, the apparent one-way causation); reception permits deep tuning and the reality of induction that is well beyond a mere surface feature offered by deduction`s one-way causation. Deep tuning involves time itself, and as a receiver it gives its support to the appearance of one-way flow. But it was never the effect at the end of cause that we seek at the end of time`s long road, but the "journey" that sources the middle-term offered by our action. Time escapes, with Spirit, through the middle-term! It`s the journey! This is the only way that our DNA has been so extremely coopted that our very few 25,000 genes were never human genes to begin with. Heraclitus`s Logos becomes self-evident, but I would not leap to the conclusion that this realization is without a precondition. The apparent Logos is its own precondition, and the stripping away of pre-given presumptions is better described by Husserl`s phenomenology. There remains an issue of a presumed rejection of vitalism by those that still over prescribe biochemistry, and chemistry. In fact, life can`t be explained by chemistry. Moreover, all the laws of nature are time symmetric, or two-sided as in the case of the second law (noted above). To say that chemistry explains away vitalism is to exclude the middle term that holds the two-sided laws together; it can`t be done. To say that vitalism is safely excluded is to commit the fallacy of excluded middle. Life`s vitalism is selfevident by the fact that the whole is not explained by its parts, and hence the middle-term is found active and is found impacting on the question of causation. 6. To a Universal Grammar Kant`s Critique of Pure Reason describes the “third antinomy” and gives the dual arguments where it is possible to argue that freewill is real, or that all is a product of an overreaching causation. Kant found the arguments to be equally valid, but it is now clear that the antinomy is felt in heated argument given the rift between generality and particularity. The certitude of feeling is enough to explain the antinomy as I noted before (Smith 2007), and heal the rift in general terms; if not in particular. It is possible to turn the antinomy, and its dynamics, into a universal grammar that follows a path that resolves felt tension.One side of the third antinomy represents freedom and the suspension of judgements (granted to a particularity that departs from generality), the other side represents natural law and teleological judgements (found in a return to generality). Both sides are held together by the ineffable middle-term, and that is as far as we can go, almost. We can progress forward because the middle-term is also felt, but it rest beyond literalism and yet remains accessible by intuitionist investigations.Many are seemingly free because we are "alone," we are alone because we are One. Both sides of the third antinomy are found agreeing, but egocentric freedom is not an absolute.What is felt is sense-certain. What is felt signifies a call to action (when what is felt is unacceptable and judgment is needed), and it also signifies resolution ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 438 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality (when feeling as messenger need only be accepted and permitted its freedom). Therefore, feeling reduces to both sides of the third antinomy. When words that carry feeling are reduced to what is starkly real and signified by the third antinomy, communication is realized. This realization is mostly subconscious, but it is nevertheless guided by the universal grammar; e.g., following the interplay of deduction and induction noted in Section 3.The universal grammar pertains to what is most primitive, the most innate feeling that sources the antinomy (or the middle-term). It is the cultivation of this innate that constitutes evolution, in my view. I have already noted that all of physics is contained by the senderreceiver unity: the acts of sending and receiving. Only the middle-term must be flushed out to reveal the grandness of evolution, including the mystery of biological information. The universal grammar is found as a panpsychist organizing principle. The third antinomy indicates the act of becoming: the movement from the Many (freedom side) to the One (judgment side); and from the One to the Many. Speaking precedes from the One to the Many, and listening returns back to Many from the One. The convergent dialectic is now the resolution of felt tension that underwrites our words, when One and Many are found agreeing in the wake of becoming. The bipolar dialect (non-convergent) indicates blockage, where One and Many are unable to agree. They indicate something outside the sender-receiver unity, mere assertions that are never tested by science and yet are invoked to force a one-sided presentation of the antinomy while leaving the felt tension in its nakedness. The grand plurality of words (nouns) is now permitted their articulation, given that one side of the third antinomy indicates the Many. But the Many must make sense to the One, and hence words come in sentences that flow where the verb is primary and connects subject to object. The plurality of feelings makes sense to the One, as permitted by the third antinomy. Therefore, plurality and singularity are resolved. This resolution extends to verbs. Words are concepts that emerge from concept-formation as indicated by objectivism. However, the concepts are now recognized as Kantian synthetics that reach across the antinomy, they are not products of Rand`s (1990, Chapter 8) “law of identity” that are also conveniently found ignoring the very emotive middle-term that holds concepts together. The law of identity only blunders into tautology, that concept is only concept that it is. Rather, it is the middle-term that signifies the changeless identity. It is the authentic synthesis that supports identity that unites the analytic and the empirical. Even the facts of reality that passes over to human concepts, come as authentic synthetics that are open to less than perfect interpretations. This simple modification corrects Rand`s epistemology. The Many now reconcile themselves with the One, and this implies that knowledge is vastly additive as predicted by objectivism, but coming with a proviso that emotion becomes more fully integrated with logic. The act of becoming also indicates the movement of time (and finding that which is countable), and this movement must also carry a feeling that also seeks resolution. Freedom passes over to teleological judgment. The equivocation of a-priori foresight and a-posteriori hindsight sheds itself and returns as discernment. What had been is now resolved, and so there is time tense: the past; present, and future. Word movements are permitted their time tense within the structure of the third antinomy. 7. Conclusion Objectivism failed to accommodate human logic and language, because emotionality cannot be eliminated from reality and pushed into a separate world that is left untended. My intuitionist account of logic and language succeeds, in my estimation, because emotionality finds a better integration in reality. This preserves what is found correct in Rand`s objectivism, and while retracting what is wrong. However, my resolution remains only in general terms, as particular counterexamples may be nominated to contradict my grammar. Despite these possible efforts, my guess is that the above generality will remain. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 439 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality The generality of threeness does not disappear, even in the confines offered by a non-monotonic logic that permits retraction. It will only be the advocates of a monotonic logic, and a one-sided freedom, that will find themselves unable to return from particularity back to generality. Particularity must return to words that hint of generality, or there is just tension that has failed to articulate its intension. My intuitionist grammar is agreeable with Husserl`s transcendental subjectivity, where language carries intension and seek affirmation. Language is seen as lest toxic, compared to Brouwer`s intuitionist mathematics. Nevertheless, the above grammar permits strife and a run for freedom to break away from an overbearing induction. What is unique in this grammar is the reinforcement that comes with oscillation and felt frequency. This oscillation may permit the reconciliation of Hegel`s dialectic with intuitionism, in that the dialectic unfolds by the repeated pattern given by the first and second negations. From the intuitionist perspective, the first negation occurs when the felt middle-term is misplaced, and the second negation comes when the middle-term is rediscovered: a previous hindsight is overpowered by foresight; and then an improved hindsight overcomes foresight. The particularity takes flight, to escape the stricture imposed by generality. But the particularity returns, and finds within itself a need to express itself with perfect generality. This story continues and repeats itself in words and in feelings, even as new conflicts come to the surface. Nevertheless, it is not my place to speak for the vast plurality where the instinct to flight and sought uniqueness is most pronounced; e.g., see the opposing views in Ibrišimovi (2009) and Sepúlveda (2005). My account is only a generality that relates to a self-evident rhythm of renewal, and so my proclivity is to the general. The grammatical oscillation (between foresight and hindsight) is indicative of the interplay of frequentist and Bayesian statistics. The Frequentist may engineer future statistical outcomes that may refute an inductive hypothesis, whereas in principle the Bayesian can integrate all past observations and build a posterior distribution to reestablish an improved induction. Foresight leads to fragmentation and active sowing (sending), whereas hindsight permits harvest (receiving) and pulling everything back together. These are the proclivities of the particular and general, respectively. When both are unified by synthesis their oscillation is presented as a felt rhythm. The middle-term that holds particularity to generality is beyond, but as the two proclivities become more authentic the felt oscillation becomes more refined, or unblocked. This provides an ontological justification for a panentheism that reconnects with felt emotion and ecstatic revival. Moreover, the logic is turned into a universal grammar to provide an organizing principle. This restores an active mind to the universe and evolution, thereby endorsing panpsychism. Acknowledgment: This essay emerged from internet discussions that were posted on serenity-andtolerance. I am indebted to all of my list members that have impacted my thinking. References Husserl, Edmund, 1970, The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Northwestern University Press. IbrišimoviN, Damir, 2009, My Stories, Trafford Publishing. Popper, Karl R., 1965, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, Harper Torchbooks. Rand, Ayn, 1990, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology: Expanded Second Edition, Plume. Sepúlveda, Jesús, 2005, The Garden of Peculiarities, Feral House. Smith, S.P., 2007, Trinity: the scientific basis of vitalism and transcendentalism, iUniverse. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 440 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 429-440 Smith, S. P. The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality Smith, S.P., 2009. Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems, see: http://vixra.org/abs/0912.0056. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(1): 16-36. Stove, David, 1998, Anything Goes: Origins of the Cult Scientific Irrationalism, Macleay Press. Van Atten, Mark, 2004, On Brouwer, Thomson Wadsworth. Wallace, B. Alan, 2000, The Taboo of Subjectivity: Toward a New science of consciousness, Oxford University Press. Whitehead, Alfred North, 1969, Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology, The Free Press. Yourgrau, Palle, 2006, A World Without Time: The Forgotten Legacy of Gödel and Einstein, Basic Books. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

511 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 511-515 Globus, G. Now Research Essay Now Gordon Globus* Abstract The Now is not of time but of Being, dis-closure. Time is continually stretched (Heidegger’s temporal ekstases) whereas Now is a match “between-two.” The now is unfolded anew in the dual mode match of each segmented Moment. There is no universal creative Now, as Nixon (2010) suggests, but unique fragmented Nows, monadological Nows, discreet dis-closures of Being within scattered monads of sufficient complexity. Keywords: Now, time, being, moment, consciousness. Introduction “Now,” “Time,” “Consciousness,” “Being” … these crucial terms are replete with philosophical confusions. Assimilating “Now” into “Time” is the greatest detriment, for Now is properly presence, Being, the palpable fullness of being-here-now. The Now is disclosure—Heidegger’s (1962) dis-closure, or, positively phrased, a lighting-up of a clearing (die Lichtung). The Now is actually segmented presencings. Hiley (2001) calls the segments “Moments” while Freeman and Vitiello (2006) liken them to a roll of individual “frames” in a movie film, which when run fast enough lose any hint of segmentation. Stapp (2009) attributes the seeming continuity of what is an actually segmented Now to a “quantum Zeno effect” in which rapidly repeated measurements sustain continuity of the quantum preparation measured. The Now is “where” we always already find ourselves, amidst phenomena of some kind or other, whether percepts, feelings or thoughts. The Now, as disclosure, is the key to understanding Consciousness and Time. The idea will be developed below that the Now is actually not of time but a Moment “between-two,” between dual quantum thermofield modes of a dissipative system. Heidegger developed the fruitful idea that time is not a container, as in Einstein’s block spacetime universe, but is dynamical, stretched anew at every moment. That is, Now is spontaneously created at every Moment (bringing together Heidegger and Hiley). The past moment, the past day, the past year, the past century – the past is differently stretched at different moments, and the same for the segmented stretching of future too. Heideggerian time is a fluctuating horizon whose time metric is continually dimensionalized. The stretching of the time dimension, along * Correspondence: Gordon Globus, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Philosophy, University of California Irvine. Email: ggglobus@uci.edu . ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 512 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 511-515 Globus, G. Now with other types of stretching (e.g., space), leads to a dynamical situatedness that is Dasein’s own doing. Dasein’s intentional actions stretch and thereby situate. Time is Dasein’s creation. For the present discussion the Now is the state of thrownness, an eruptive being amidst a world of pragmatic presencings or mental contents. A life is disclosed in the Now for each of us. Heidegger’s conception of now fails to make a crucial distinction, however, which ends up confusing. Heidegger considered the Now stretched too (now as you read this, now in the 21st century), just as past and future are stretched. But when Now extends past the Moment, presence is lost. In the context of “now this year” the distinction is lost between that part of the now-thisyear that presences (“right now”) and the previous part of the year and the part of the year yet to come which do not presence. In the strict sense the Now cannot be stretched. Consciousness and the Now Consciousness is to my mind the greatest bone in the throat of contemporary philosophical thought, and scientific thought too. Despite a monumental amount of discussion, there is absolutely no agreement on what the term actually means (Nunn 2009). Some are even moved to cry with respect to Consciousness: Ignoramus et Ignoramibus (e.g., McGinn 1991). We are ignorant regarding Consciousness and shall remain so. Etymologically con-sciousness is to “know-together,” a cognition that is social. There is nothing perceptual in the original meaning of Consciousness; the infiltration of the perceptual into Consciousness is a poisoning by metaphysics (which lives in language, philosophy and science to this day). In Hiley’s (2001) view, time becomes nonlocal in the Moment, so there is no particular momentous now. The movement of explication in which Being unfolds is outside of Time, holds Time not in abeyance but nihilates Time. There is no ontological before and after within the Moment; Moments are sequences of creatings. Heidegger calls the attunement of such creatings “pro-jects” (Entwerfen). In the Moment there is explication of Presence, Being as such. Without memory there would be no past as such. Indeed, intention toward memory dimensionalizes time: now, past and future. This intention is a self-tuning. Without memory there would be no future. Expectation is a function of self-tuned trace. Intentional self-tuning towards traces stretches future too. Shortly the dis-closure of a Now which is not of Time will be considered. To summarize, we have put Consciousness aside, as having to do with cognition. Time as past and future is stretched by self-tuning pro-jective intentional acts and is dependent on trace. Now is orthogonal to Time. Now is disclosure, dis-closure, lighting-up, revelation (re-velation, which reverses veiling). To think Now within Time is to continue metaphysics, which is what the present discussion urges against. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 513 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 511-515 Globus, G. Now Between-two It is widely accepted that, as Neisser (1976) succinctly put it, “Perception is where cognition and reality meet.” Cutting-edge thinkings in cognitive and brain science today gussy-up Neisser’s dictum in the guise of Baysean theory. A leading proponent of the Baysean view is Friston (2010), who has developed a highly regarded “least energy” brain dynamics. This “energy,” which is mathematically formulated in elegant fashion, is interpreted as “surprise.” Selforganizing brain states spontaneously evolve so as to minimize surprise, according to Friston, where zero surprise is the perfected matching of cognitive expectation and sensory input. The organism responds to surprise in two ways: by changing its behavior in search of less surprising input and by tuning its expectations to better match the input actually available. The match in effect amounts to hypothesis confirmation. (This conception is the dynamical successor to Helmholtz’s 19th century idea of “unconscious inference.”) Least energy brain dynamics is a thoroughly cognitive theory. Expectations are confirmed by the match. Perception is a matter of hypothesis confirmation, which makes perception cognitive rather than disclosive. The Now for the least energy proposal is a succession of hypothesis confirmations in the stream of time. The relation of the cognitive now of least energy theory to time is along the lines of traditional representation theory where the brain builds a temporal succession of models of the world from sensory input, memory and intention. Whether hypothesis confirmation or representation, the Now remains within time in traditional fashion. The theory of the between-two (Globus 2009) has the Now orthogonal to past and future time. Here there are two quantum modes, one relating to sensory and self-tuning inputs and the other to traces of sensory and self-tuning inputs. The match between these two modes (which takes place in the quantum ground or “vacuum” state) is no longer like the match of a lock and a key but like the match of complex conjugates, a+bi matching to a-bi, with the result real. Dual imaginary modes disclose phenomena in the ground state between-two in virtue of their match. Presence/Being is created/explicated/unfolded in the belonging-together of dual modes—which is fundamentally different from both hypothesis confirmation and construction of representations. Now is between-two in the match of complementary complex conjugates. Sensory and self-tuning inputs together with traces are participants. To revise Neisser’s dictum, perception (world-thrownness) is where cognition and reality are complementary, hence disclosive. The view developed here is rather Bohmian in spirit (Bohm 1980). The fundamental dynamic or “holomovement” is pre-space and pre-time. Space-time Now is repetitively explicated each Moment, unfolded from the holomovement simultaneously with a reenfoldment of the previous Moment back into the plenum that is the holomovement. Of course, as Pylkkӓnen (2007) discusses, consciousness figures prominently in Bohmian theory. Bohm’s philosophy was Spinozan, consistent with Whitehead, and also influenced by J. Krishnamurti; there was no existential turn. However Bohm and Whitehead have been recently assimilated to Heidegger ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 514 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 511-515 Globus, G. Now (Globus 2009). Along such lines the existential state of world-thrownness is continually unfolded such that the Now is the match of the between-two. The fragmented nows of monads Nixon (this issue) conceives time as moving through a recurrent and reiterating now. There is a universal conscious now which hosts the passage of time. It is an uncreated creative source of past and future on Nixon’s view (with its Aristotelian overtones). The present claim in contrast is that the Now is also created in the same Moment as past and future, rather than being their metaphysical receptacle. The Now is furthermore fragmented into monadic Nows in parallel (here somewhat reminiscent of Leibniz). These fragmented Nows in parallel are disclosures between-two. No metaphysical subject is permitted to stand outside all of them. The Now consists in Moments of becoming. Leibniz was not to be trapped in the notion that God is responsible for good and evil. After all, God operates an optimization principle that would result in the greatest good for the greatest number, but God is not responsible for individual monadic actions that meet his emanations. There is choice within monads, or, in the present context, self-tuning that constrains the betweentwo. Self-tuning can bring selfish evil against the Leibnitzean God’s loving intention to optimize the Good. Each monad is responsible for its Now, which lets God off the hook. An hierarchical fragmentation of the Now operates also. There is a halt in the descent into the Now beloved of panpsychists, who find the Now in every particle. To the contrary, Now does not go all the way down into fundamental matter (Globus 2009a). A large quantity of quanta, on the order of Avogadro’s number, must be available before cooperative quantum dynamics (coherence) might take place. A gas does not have cooperative dynamics in its between-two. A crystal does—but its between-two is static. It is the dissipative brain’s achievement to sustain a between-two whose fluctuating dual mode matchings are disclosive of particular Nows. So the disclosive Now is scattered among rich enough Monads; the rest of them are stuck each in its same Now or having no Now at all. Conclusion The Now is freshly conceived in the context of dissipative quantum thermofield brain dynamics. The Now to our surprise does not sort with time but with Being, dis-closure. Thinking Now with time is a continuation of the metaphysics that postmodernism attempts to overthrow. Now is not a unity (not even a relativized unity), but is deeply broken, indeed multiplexly monadological, disclosive, existential Moments in parallel. Now thus understood no longer grounds quotidian life in a reassuring unity right now but is terrifying in the fragmentation of each to their own Now. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 515 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 511-515 Globus, G. Now References Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the implicate order. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Freeman, W., Vitiello, G. (2006) “Nonlinear brain dynamics as macroscopic manifestationn of underlying many-body field dynamics.” Physics of life reviews 3(2): 93-118. Friston, K. (2010). “The free-energy principle”: A unified brain theory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience. Published online 13 Jan 2010 doi:10.1038/nrn2787. Globus, G. (2009). The transparent becoming of world. A crossing between process philosophy and quantum neurophilosophy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Globus, G. (2009a). “Halting the descent into panpsychism: A quantum thermofield theoretical perspective” (pp. 67-82). In D. Skrbina, ed., Mind that abides: Panpsychism in the new millenium. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Heidegger, M. (1927/1982). The basic problems of phenomenology (A. Hofstadter, trans.). New York: Harper and Row. Hiley, B. (2001). “Towards a dynamics of moments: The role of algebraic deformation and inequivalent vacuum states.” Proc ANAP 23:104-134. McGinn, C. (1991). The problem of consciousness. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Nixon, G.M. (2010). “Editorial.” Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research 1(5). Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and reality. San Francisco: WH Freeman. Nunn, C. (2009). “Editor’s introduction: Defining consciousness,” Journal of Consciousness Studies16(58). Pylkkӓnen, P. (2007). Mind, matter and the implicate order. Berlin: Springer. Stapp. H. (2009). Mind, matter and quantum mechanics. Berlin: Springer. Vitiello, G. (2001). My double unveiled. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 160-161 Habe, K. Review of Srecko Sorli’s Book: Einstein’s Timeless Universe: The Foundation for Cosmic Religiousness 160 Book Review Srecko Sorli: Einstein’s Timeless Universe: The Foundation for Cosmic Religiousness, 2010, 84 pp. ISBN: 3843375739, published by LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing Review of Srecko Sorli’s Book:Einstein’s Timeless Universe:The Foundation for Cosmic Religiousness Katarina Habe* ABSTRACT The main quality of the book is that it makes highly scientific research outcomes that arise mainly from physics understandable to an ordinary individual. Even more, the author creates practical implementation of the theoretical knowledge in the concept of planetary education. From my point of view as a psychologist this concept brings a revolutionary change into understanding a perception and especially in cognition of the reality. You can find the book at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Einsteins-Timeless-Universe-FoundationReligiousness/dp/3843375739/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1296061151&sr=1-1 Key Words: Einstein, timeless universe, cosmic religiousness. The frames of orthodox academic psychology are far too narrow for explaining the phenomena happening in the contemporary world. Our mind gives us just one segment of the insight of the functioning of the world. Considering scientific observation we've outgrown the fences of purely empirical studies and we have to put more effort in using our intuitive skills in understanding the world. But our world is concrete so it's quite an art to explain phenomena that are so alienated from the ordinary understanding of live in terms of material level. The book Einstein's cosmic religiousness from the author Srecko Sorli introduces revolutionary perspective of integrating science and religiousness. It contains 7 chapters, beginning with more physical explanation of the perception of the reality and gradually progresses towards more psychological issues. We could also say that the author unfolds the main idée from the theory into the practice. For me as a psychologist and a musician the most interesting ideas are introduced in a chapter 7 in which the author explains the concept of an integration of scientific and religious (we could also say by my opinion artistic) experience. Science is based on a rational human mind and therefore confronts itself with many limits. The scientific way of explaining the reality is far from effective for understanding the phenomena happening nowadays in our World. The time has come that our civilization finds a different more conscious level of understanding and interacting with the reality. Therefore the integration of scientific and religious (artistic) experience is unavoidable. We could also say that science (analytical approach) and religiousness or art (intuitive approach) must work hand in hand. The science has to move towards accepting the conscious experience as its research tool. Considering the commonly recognized scientific paradigm we experience the world in a perspective of inner time, past-present-future. But the past and the future belong to time and now is the only physical world that exists. So this new concept of understanding the reality forces us to move towards “the moment” as a main subject of our observation. Correspondence: Katarina Habe, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Faculty of Education, Univ. of Maribor, & Academy of Music, Univ. of Ljubljana, Slovenia. E-mail: katarina.habe@uni-mb.si ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 160-161 Habe, K. Review of Srecko Sorli’s Book: Einstein’s Timeless Universe: The Foundation for Cosmic Religiousness 161 Considering psychological research field we could draw some parallels with the main idée presented in this book and the concept of “the flow” that was introduced by the psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi . We could also see some similarities between the presented concept and peak experience introduced by Abraham Maslow. “Flow” is the way people describe their state of mind when consciousness is harmoniously ordered. Flow is the source of human happiness, it's the experience of a harmony between human outer and inner world. Some of the characteristics of flow merge with the idea of time perception presented in the book; the main are that there is an intense concentration in moment and that perception of time is relative. It's also interesting that Csikszentmihalyi points out the connection between science and art; He mentions Mnemosyne from the Greek mythology as a mother of all the arts and sciences. So the source is one and if humankind wants to reach the “knowing” it cannot be without acknowledging both, science and art. The flow gives us a quality of life and a true peaceful enjoyment. As a result of a human alienation from its harmonious inner self our society faces with many psychological illnesses that are consequences of putting a focus on the past and the present, so with a constant competing with time in a concrete space. The only long-term solution for this situation is the awakening of consciousness, which is a basis of a solid mental health, ethics and morality. Humankind has to take a step from thinking and believing to knowing; from indirect towards direct experience of our reality. The idée of the connection of mind to consciousness assures the responsibility of one's actions. It gives us the opportunity to act as humankind on the autonomous stage of morality (Piaget) or post conventional level by Kohlberg. In essence this last level of morality entails reasoning rooted in the ethical fairness principles. The main quality of the book Einstein's cosmic religiousness is that it makes highly scientific research outcomes that arise mainly from physics understandable to an ordinary individual. Even more, the author creates practical implementation of the theoretical knowledge in the concept of planetary education. From my point of view as a psychologist this concept brings a revolutionary change into understanding a perception and especially in cognition of the reality. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 449-450 McCarthy, M. A Compliment and a Supplement to Nixon 449 Commentary A Compliment and a Supplement to Nixon Maurice McCarthy* ABSTRACT To apprehend the mythic origins we have to try to sink into what it feels like to be such a consciousness. Of course it is impossible, in one sense, as we always keep our present rationality with us. Yet the method remains correct. You cannot remain aloof from the subjective and know what it is. We take our rationality into the mythic mind for dreams should be judged by waking consciousness and not by another dream. What Nixon has opened out for me at this moment remains to great for me too to comprehend and comment further. Doubtless there will be many corrections and enhancements but everything turns upon grasping the principle of original selfcreation, self-organisation, self-sustainment, self-unfolding or self-enclosure and it is to the grasping of this autopoesy that I would like to add a few words. Key Words: autopoesy, mythic origin, self-creation, consciousness. Reading Nixon's writings over the last decade or more I've often felt we were going to the same sort of place along different routes. There has been a felt kinship but I have never really got a grip on where he was. I kept losing my bearings. These three essays begin to open my eyes to his path(Nixon, 2010a, 2010b, 2010c). Unfamiliar with many of his sources, there were times when I literally gasped at what I was reading. Many times could I connect the given insights with other observations or musings of my own. For example, the original manifestation of consciousness, selfhood and the sacred in the act of killing. Human conduct ranges from a loving embrace to killing. If there were no killing then you'd never separate your own being from the loved, blood relations. Your being would always remain an intersubjective group. If you feel this intersubjectivity intensely then to kill is to kill yourself yet still remain there to see it. What a shock for Cain when he killed Abel. Nothing is more real than death, the ceasing of a self-sustaining activity. The individual self would have been ripped out of the group by its own slaughter. Various musings then seemed to connect with all this. a) When the hands were nailed down they could not kill. The outstretched arms on the cross symbolise powerless, open love held up to the world as the means to overcome all karma. Of such is the force of poetic imagination. To a mythic mind this imagination would be reality itself. b) In the Latin declension amo, amas, amat etc. the selves or subjects are not separated from the verb or action. The language of the time did not separate selves from objects in anything like the intensity we do. c) Legend has it that Ulfilas invented the German word for I (Ich after J. Ch.) 1600 years ago. d) The ostensible reason for Alexander making war on Persia was still the blood feud – so strong was the group self even at that time. All of these show how the intersubjective self played a strong role. To apprehend the mythic origins we have to try to sink into what it feels like to be such a consciousness. Of course it is impossible, in one sense, as we always keep our present rationality with Correspondence: Maurice McCarthy, Swansea. UK. E-mail: manselton@gmail.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 449-450 McCarthy, M. A Compliment and a Supplement to Nixon 450 us. Yet the method remains correct. You cannot remain aloof from the subjective and know what it is. We take our rationality into the mythic mind for dreams should be judged by waking consciousness and not by another dream. What Nixon has opened out for me at this moment remains to great for me too comprehend and comment further. Doubtless there will be many corrections and enhancements but everything turns upon grasping the principle of original selfcreation, self-organisation, self-sustainment, self-unfolding or self-enclosure and it is to the grasping of this autopoesy that I would like to add a few words. Many different threads lead to the necessary assertion of autopoesy. I'll indicate a few but the greatest of all is evolution itself. 1. Reason demands that all things have a cause. The simplest is when a physical event is caused by the events preceding it in sequential contact. When it comes to the totality of the universe you must either posit a external creator or the universe itself possessing an inner power to self-create or self-sustain. The physical universe only becomes self-enclosed as a totality. 2. Once upon a time an object was called real if it could be located in time and space. It gained the quality of reality by this locating. A real thing could be both seen and touched. Einstein twisted the meaning of reality. A greater theory could be found when time and space became real by their relation to an object. Relativity was the tool to push to the limits of the universe with more accurate understanding. Cosmologists now reason that to have a universe it must be one of a multiverse but there is no way to see or touch any of the others but the one you are in. The one reality we live in arises from an entirely ideal conception, the multiverse. Together the multiverse and the universe form the universal autopoesy. 3. Gödel and Chaitin's incompleteness theorems both become incomplete when we enter selfreference. All logic fails the autopoietic. Yet, the universal autopoesy contains that logic and incompleteness, irrationality, confusion and all error. 4. A living thing is a form impressed upon a flow of matter. Every living thing causes its own growth, movement and reproduction. Darwin's theory presumed autopoesy in his original statement. He had no theory of self-organising variability because there is only one source of variation. It is universal and fluid autopoesy. Its action is to create then flow into the interstices of its own creations so that its own manifestations self-restrict as natural selection. Natural Selection is limiting not causal. It is a set of determinations created by autopoesy (the entire environment and all living things). Genetics, the attempt to suppress knowledge of autopoesy, is the chemical correlate of biology. 5. Living things are all self-enclosed realities. Self-enclosure is conceptual in form. In other words it has the appearance of purpose. Thus the self-creative principle is everywhere but hidden from the physical senses all around us. Reason demands its causal presence because no physical explanation is adequate to life, experience or consciousness. Physicality has a construct of many causal laws standing apart from the real things but life and subjectivity have but one causal law standing inside them all. The particular life-forms all proceed from this one immanent creative principle. With this principle clearly grasped Nixon turns out a stunning synthesis attempting to tease out the temporal development of consciousness from experience. References Nixon,G. M. (2010a) From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience: The Continuum of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 216-233. Nixon,G. M. (2010b) Hollows of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. Nixon,G. M. (2010c) Myth and mind: the origin of human consciousness in the discovery of the sacred. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 289-337. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 451-453 Sharkie, M. Comments on Nixon Three Essays 451 Commentary Comments on Nixon’s Three Essays Matt Sharkie* ABSTRACT Nixon does indicate that all may not be well in our much vaunted leap into analytical selfconsciousness, but this seems to be missed by most commentators. The dimming shadow of self hangs over all our technological successes. Have we become largely physically and even spiritually impotent by the self construction that controls our emotions and our world? Are we so controlled that our lives "end not with a bang but a whimper"? Eliot seems to think so, and it appears Nixon is in full agreement. In fact, there are plenty of indications that he, Nixon, feels a nostalgia for untamed, uninhibited life in Nature. His explanation how we became "symbol-mongers" is most impressive and the literary manner in which he pulls it off really demonstrates his point more than his artificial use of scholarship or reason. Key Words: analytical, self-consciousness, Eliot, symbol. Thank you for JCER 1(3) focused on three essays by Gregory M. Nixon (2010a, 2010b, 2010c). These three work in concert to provide a complete perspective on consciousness studies and what a refreshing perspective it is! The essays explore the likelihood that when we refer to "consciousness", the only actual referent for the word we have available is our own conscious experience, which, as philosophic phenomenology has revealed, is always self-consciousness. Between our minds "in here" and the world "out there" interposes the mirror of self, or perhaps the order should be reversed so that the world "out there" is the source for the illusory mind in here. As a result of this, according to Nixon, we err when we attribute this same consciousness to other animals, though clearly such animals (and even plants and perhaps even all dynamic systems) are aware or, as he seems to prefer, experiencing, so Nixon develops the concept of unconscious experience. In essay one (Nixon, 2010a), he labors on this distinction with general success, I think, but unfortunately he may be interpreted by some as being "anthropocentric" by claiming that our human self-consciousness or conscious experience is in some way superior to other forms of experience. I see no evidence of this, and in his second essay (Nixon, 2010b), the beautifully named "Hollows of Experience", he makes clear that we may have lost something vital in becoming conscious of our own animal experiencing. That our attainment of conscious experience is equal to the attainment of abstract symbolic communication via the structures of formal language is made overwhelmingly clear in this grand essay, and I, for one, certainly applaud his use of poetry and other literary devices to make his point, since his point is that our minds have crossed a literary threshold, the symbolic threshold, into a new world of human culture that is made almost entirely of the abstract symbols we believe in so fervently. He quotes T. S. Eliot here and there, but I do not recall seeing any quotations from Eliot's "The Hollow Men", which seems to me would augment his "hollows of experience" and "hollows of memory" perfectly. Yes, we have created a new world of symbolic experience that goes far beyond the natural environment of our embodiment and in which we have far more choices, but have we also isolated ourselves from the vital sources of life? Eliot begins his poem with this suggestion: We are the hollow men We are the stuffed men Correspondence: Matt Sharkie E-mail: sharkiematt@gmail.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 451-453 Sharkie, M. Comments on Nixon Three Essays 452 Leaning together Headpiece filled with straw. Alas! Our dried voices, when We whisper together Are quiet and meaningless As wind in dry grass Or rats’ feet over broken glass In our dry cellar According to Eliot, we have lost the ability to act in a decisive fashion, perhaps even to make the spiritual leaps that would lead to transcendent experiences. We are immersed in, lost in self, the frame of our conscious experience. "No matter where we go, there we are" takes on a whole new meaning here. Could it be that inescapable self-presence is the shadow to which Eliot refers in his final lines? Between the idea And the reality Between the motion And the act Falls the Shadow For Thine is the Kingdom Between the conception And the creation Between the emotion And the response Falls the Shadow Life is very long Between the desire And the spasm Between the potency And the existence Between the essence And the descent Falls the Shadow For Thine is the Kingdom So, in brief, Nixon does indicate that all may not be well in our much vaunted leap into analytical selfconsciousness, especially in Part II of this essay, but this seems to be missed by most commentators. The dimming shadow of self hangs over all our technological successes. Have we become largely physically and even spiritually impotent by the self construction that controls our emotions and our world? Are we so controlled that our lives "end not with a bang but a whimper"? Eliot seems to think so, and it appears Nixon is in full agreement. In fact, there are plenty of indications that he, Nixon, feels a nostalgia for untamed, uninhibited life in Nature (and he does capitalize "nature" more than once). His explanation how we became "symbol-mongers" is most impressive and the literary manner in which he pulls it off really demonstrates his point more than his artificial use of scholarship or reason. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 451-453 Sharkie, M. Comments on Nixon Three Essays 453 That he is an artist more than a scholar is finally made clear in his last essay, "Myth and Mind". Nixon is no doubt erudite and as well-read as any other scholar I've read, but he does not fear to make leaps of the imagination or draw connections just because they fit into the story he is telling. I applaud him for this since his message, again, is more literary than scientific. That Nixon is aware of this is made clear in his Introduction, where he admits that, finally, his works are "mythmaking". But aren't all our works just so? Even our so-called facts must be interpreted into some sort of story structure. In the last essay, he insists we are creatures of our own mythology; we are autopoietic selfcreations and this process continues. Nixon even implies that all our knowledge is in essence a form of mythology. We cannot escape our own creation. I believe that this revelation is the most hopeful thing about these essays, for it implies that we may yet find the global myths that will liberate us from our isolation in cultures and selves. Finally, these essays (Nixon, 2010a, 2010b & 2010c) are important more as prophecies than as explanations. Whether Nixon's detailed explanations are true in any way that can be proven I have no idea. But his fine literary skills and metaphoric craftsmanship lead the reader to believe that s/he can become more than s/he is, if only we can find the right way to conceive of ourselves, and then find the right way to put those selves aside as we stand ready to become something entirely other. References Nixon,G. M. (2010a) From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience: The Continuum of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 216-233. Nixon,G. M. (2010b) Hollows of Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 234-288. Nixon,G. M. (2010c) Myth and mind: the origin of human consciousness in the discovery of the sacred. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 289-337. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

625 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core Exploration Whitehead & the Elusive Present Process Philosophy’s Creative Core Gregory M. Nixon* Abstract Time’s arrow is necessary for progress from a past that has already happened to a future that is only potential until creatively determined in the present. But time’s arrow is unnecessary in Einstein’s so-called block universe, so there is no creative unfolding in an actual present. How can there be an actual present when there is no universal moment of simultaneity? Events in various places will have different presents according to the position, velocity, and nature of the perceiver. Standing against this view is traditional common sense since we normally experience time’s arrow as reality and the present as our place in the stream of consciousness, but we err to imagine we are living in the actual present. The present of our daily experience is actually a specious present, according to E. Robert Kelly (later popularized by William James), or duration, according to Henri Bergson, an habitus, as elucidated by Kerby (1991), or, simply, the psychological present (Adams, 2010) – all terms indicating that our experienced present so consists of the past overlapping into the future that any potential for acting from the creative moment is crowded out. Yet, for philosophers of process from Herakleitos onward, it is the philosophies of change or process that treat time’s arrow and the creative fire of the actual present as realities. In this essay, I examine the most well known but possibly least understood process cosmology of Alfred North Whitehead to seek out this elusive but actual present. In doing so, I will also ask if process philosophy is itself an example of the creative imagination and if this relates to doing science. Keywords: Whitehead, process philosophy, elusive present, creative, time’s arrow. §1. Bergson. “Time is invention or it is nothing at all” (Bergson, 1983, p. 341). “But, as regards the psychical life unfolding beneath the symbols which conceal it, we readily perceive that time is just the stuff it is made of” (Bergson, 1983, p. 4). Though the focus of this little study is Whitehead, Bergson provided a context for the minute specificities of Whitehead’s insightful speculations, and probably opened intellectual and intuitive doors that encouraged Whitehead’s process cosmology possible. In various works, Bergson has shown us that the human experience of time is mostly an illusion, and this is especially true of our sense of living in the present. For Bergson, the contents of consciousness itself are naught but memories. Memory performs the almost * Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada. Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx Email: doknyx@shaw.ca www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 626 mystic function of uniting our inner experience with the outer experience of the world. He claimed that “memory ... is just the intersection of mind and matter” (1912, p. xii). We project our experience from a remembered past into an anticipated future, all the while believing we are in a present in which time flows by, as though we were carried along in a swift river, hardly able to affect to its course. Without an actual present, how can time do anything but repeat itself? “Of the future, only that is foreseen which is like the past or can be made up again with elements like those of the past” (Bergson, 1983, p. 28). Without an actual present, there are no fires of creation. However, Bergson’s duration (la durée) is more than just the habitual habitus of our illusory present. When reflected upon in great depth, la durée is found to have a creative core that intuition (not intellect) reveals as universal and not just personal. He expressed this most strongly in Creative Evolution (1983), the title of which reveals his insight and makes his case against Newton’s cosmic clockwork and Einstein’s so-called block universe in which time loses its universal status. Bergson believed that the future was not determined in advance but that a creative power underlay the processes of the world, which includes both matter and memory (thus mind), and may have its expression in language. As two later process philosophers put it: Bergsonian intuition is a concentrated attention, an increasingly difficult attempt to penetrate deeper into the singularity of things. Of course, to communicate, intuition must have recourse to language. … This it does with infinite patience and circumspection, at the same time accumulating images and comparisons in order to “embrace reality,” thus suggesting in an increasingly precise way what cannot be communicated by means of general terms and abstract ideas. (Prigogine & Stengers, 1984, p. 91) Attempting to deny both idealism and realism, Bergson reasoned that matter is an “aggregate of ‘images.’ And by ‘image’ we mean a certain existence which is more than that which the idealist calls a representation, but less than that which the realist calls a thing” (1912, p. vii). Each traditional position, then, depends upon the perspective taken. If memory remains only perceptual memory, he writes in Matter and Memory (1912), then we may be helped to make evolution creative: But this is not all. By allowing us to grasp in a single intuition multiple moments of duration, it frees us from the movement of the flow of things, that is to say, from the rhythm of necessity. The more of these moments memory can contract into one, the firmer is the hold which it gives to us on matter: so that the memory of a living being appears indeed to measure, above all, its powers of action upon things, and to be only the intellectual reverberation of this power. (p. 303) Bergson is suggesting that by contracting the moments of memory into one, one may become nearer to the creative present, whence the nature of matter unfolds. It appears that if we can participate in the creative present, we can affect the nature of matter. Such pure memory has access to what he calls different planes of consciousness, or, sometimes, pure spirit. Pure memory, he indicates is a pure potential for action to create the next www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 627 creative field of order science can then convince itself it has discovered. The world, that is to say, does not come to exist with its objects, i.e., objectively, until the “intelligence” perceives it as such. Simultaneously, the intelligence gives itself mental form through the conceptualization of its actions: “Thus the same movement by which the mind is brought to form itself into intellect, that is to say, into distinct concepts, brings matter to break itself up into objects excluding one another. The more consciousness is intellectualized, the more matter is spatialized” (1983, p. 189). Bergson never develops a complete system or cosmology or states imperatives, but he does indicate that if we wish to find the real, to participate in the ongoing emergence of creation, we must cease projecting a future from a “present” which seems to exist only because we are always in the process of remembering it: We should no longer be asking where a moving body will be, what shape a system will take, through what state a change will pass at a given moment: the moments of time, which are only arrests of our attention, would no longer exist; it is the flow of time, it is the very flux of the real that we should be trying to follow. (1983, p. 342) La durée refers to time as the becoming of a reality that is never become, though the intellect perceives it so. The rational intellect is an important survival mechanism that evolution has made manifest, Bergson says, but it seems only able to carry us along into a future we have determined shall be as identical as possible with the past. If there is no real present, an interesting implication is that we have created our sense of the present with the immediate memories of the past, but the only creative position is always the slightly extended futurity of becoming. The “present” may be created from the duration already moving into the future — with the materials of the past — from which “present” we project the “future,” and so on. We cannot perceive beyond our senses that are limited by our intellect’s “use” of memory to perceive. And we cannot creatively act with intellect alone, which works only within the flow of time: For, as soon as we are confronted with true duration, we see that it means creation, and that if that which is being unmade endures, it can only be because it is inseparably bound to what is making itself. Thus will appear the necessity of a continual growth of the universe, I should say of a life of the real. And thus will be seen in a new light the life which we find on the surface of our planet, a life directed the same way as that of the universe, and inverse of materiality. To intellect, in short, there will be added intuition. (p. 343) It is intuition, according to Bergson, that guides us into “true duration,” a union with the power of creativity found there (the immediacy of élan vital). Bergson’s position seems to be that an intuitional memory can seek the symbols beyond the perceived circle of self — the habitus — in the creative imagination that emerges from the timeless. www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 628 In what fashion can we imagine time unfolding or our infolding into time? Lifting my head, I hear my fan circulate the summer heat. I look beyond my iMac and see Rasputin, our Siberian husky, asleep on the cool linoleum, and I feel the solidity of this body relentlessly tapping away at these keys (apologies to Descartes!). How can creative duration be conceived as happening amidst these realistic events? Whitehead is often considered to have taken Bergson’s suggestions about time and memory and to have completed them in a systematic fashion. I ask myself: Is there a place for creative imagination or an actual present in Whitehead’s intricate cosmology? §2. Becoming as Process: A. N. Whitehead. [W]e experience the universe, and we analyze in our consciousness a minute selection of its details. (Whitehead, 1968, p. 121) My initial response to the latter question would be to simply reply in the affirmative. Since any human construction of a cosmology cannot ultimately be verified experimentally and since, by definition, any human is within its own ideas of a cosmos, a cosmology is a work of speculative philosophy, which Whitehead has extensively defined. Speculative philosophy in our rationalizing world is related to the creative imagination. A cosmology is, itself, a work of imagination that endeavours to divest itself of the cosmetics of imagery, drama, and allusion to specific culture-heroes or divinities (Whitehead, 1978). This is insufficient, however, so I will proceed to dissect the terms of the question. Following this, I will attempt a brief outline of Whitehead’s cosmology, as “ultimate” then as “immediate,” especially as portrayed in Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology (1978) realizing that this statement and my limitations could not possibly do Whitehead’s magnum opus its deserved justice. I shall then speculate whether or not Whitehead intended the creative present to have a background or central place in his cosmic scheme, or if such place can be found. §3. Whitehead’s Ultimates. Influenced by Einstein’s theory of relativity, Whitehead developed his theory based on spacetime, rather than understanding space and time as separate dimensions of the same unfolding reality. We perceive extension in space-time and understand reality to be present and solid: We must first consider the perceptive mode in which there is clear, distinct consciousness of the “extensive” relations of the world. These relations include the “extensiveness” of space and the “extensiveness” of time. Undoubtedly, this clarity, at least in regard to space, is obtained only in ordinary perception through the senses. This mode of perception is here termed “presentational immediacy.” In this “mode” the contemporary world is consciously prehended as a continuum of extensive relations. (Whitehead, 1978, p. 61) www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 629 The senses, however, are later developments upon a deeper, less conscious mode of awareness called prehension. This accepted, experience need not be restricted to entities with sensory organs: On this basis, it is not absurd to attribute a vague kind of emotional-purposive perceptivity to those lower organisms that are devoid of sensory organs. … To say that all individual events prehend the things in their environments is to say that they take influences from them into themselves and have some sort of emotionalappetitive response to them. (Griffin, 1988, p. 153) In this statement, David Ray Griffin, prominent Whitehead interpreter and promoter1, does not pursue the matter beyond “lower organisms” to its smaller and more momentary limit: the actual entity (for the space oriented), or the actual event (for the time oriented), or, simply, the occasion, defined by Whitehead as “a momentary experiential event which occupies (or constitutes) a region that is spatial as well as temporal” (in Griffin, p. 151). So instead of semi-permanent “things” changing through a continuous flow of time, we have experiencing occasions which appear, prehend their environments, perhaps adapt to some “extent,” and disappear as experiencing occasions to become completed objective occasions. These occasions include events at the subatomic level and those of macrocosmic stature. The occasion is the act of becoming, like Bergson’s duration, the process of which is going on “all the time.” These are the existential realities, according to Whitehead — experiential occasions becoming, achieving satisfaction, and perishing. Their prehension guides them to satisfaction and alters them through the environmental influence of other, past occasions. In their “perishing” they become fixed as objective occasions which will now influence the becoming of subjects of new actual events. As Griffin (1988) explains: [A]n object is an event that had been, in itself, a subject. Accordingly, it has the kind of stuff a subject can receive, i.e., feelings, whether conscious or unconscious — feelings of derivation, feelings of desire, feelings of attraction and repulsion. … By conceiving of each event as having been a subject of feeling prior to being a felt object, we can understand how an object can influence a subject. (p. 155) Thus the world according to Whitehead. But we must look deeper into Whitehead’s speculations to discover the alpha point of his cosmology. In the beginning — metaphorically speaking since “non-temporal” does not constitute linearity — was pure creativity and God in his primordial nature. Unlike Bergson and others, Whitehead does not identify God pantheistically with the primal impetus of creativity but as a non-temporal actual entity on his own. Creighton Peden (1981) concludes that Whitehead’s creativity “is without character or individuality of its own. It 1 currently better known as a 9/11 conspiracy theorist ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 630 is the active, creative force of the universe, being conditioned by the objective immortality of the actual world and by God” (p. 35). Bergson would likely accept condition one. Studying Whitehead seems often a matter of learning a new terminology, but, as in all self-referential language systems, each term has meaning only in reference to other terms and the assumed meta-meaning of the entire language. Some terms never emerge, it seems, as actual entities — just as in Whitehead’s system actual entities are really processes. Here at the beginning of Whitehead’s cosmogony, it seems important to understand the difference between the conceptions of “creativity” and “God,” since specifically human creativity will be the subject of the next section. Creativity as a first principle allows Whitehead to avoid the mechanistic view of straightforward cause and effect determination and to account for the dendritic nature of evolution. Further, his conjectures about eternal objects, aims, and even God’s primordial nature, which — combined with the also primordial creativity — allow him to explain the unpredictable outcome of each “concrescence” of occasions that results in “novelty” in the universe. As Whitehead (1978) explains in more detail: “Creativity” is the universal of universals characterizing ultimate matter of fact. It is that ultimate principle by which the many, which are the universe disjunctively, become the one actual occasion, which is the universe conjunctively. “Creativity” is the principle of novelty. An actual occasion is a novel entity diverse from any entity in the “many” which it unifies. Thus “creativity” introduces novelty into the content of the many, which are the universe disjunctively. The “creative advance” is the application of this ultimate principle of creativity to each novel situation which it originates. … The ultimate metaphysical principle is the advance from disjunction to conjunction, creating a novel entity other than the entity. … The novel entity is at once the togetherness of the “many” which it finds, and also it is one among the disjunctive “many” which it leaves; it is a novel entity, disjunctively among the many entities which it synthesizes. The many become one and are increased by one. (p. 26) Creativity is both the ultimate reality and the active principle in the concrescence of the many to produce a novel actual occasion, as in Whitehead’s expressive phrase: “The many become one and are increased by one.” The novel actual occasion then embodies its novel creativity as one of the many to be used in the concrescence of the next actual occasion, an increase of one. In this way, creativity may be understood as inhering as self-creativity in each event. As Peden (1981) interprets: Because of creativity, every actual entity, temporal or non-temporal, is to some degree self-creative. Every actual entity, being to some degree self-creative, is a novel being. On the basis of novelty … an actual entity is a new form in the universe. The doctrine of creativity points to the fact that constantly new forms are being created and are perishing in the universe. (p. 35) www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 631 If reality were understood as purely creative, however, then literally anything could happen. Reality would be a chaos of novelty in which even dendritic patterns could turn back upon themselves in disarray. To explain the seeming form of the onflow of reality, Whitehead invokes an ultimate actuality to guide his ultimate reality. Griffin (1989) theologizes: God, who is the source of all physical, aesthetic, and ethical principles, is the ultimate actuality. … The ultimate reality and the ultimate actuality are equally primordial. God does not create creativity, but neither does creativity generate God. Each equally presupposes the other. Creativity that is uninfluenced by God’s persuasion toward ordered beauty therefore never occurs. (p. 31) God is present “at the beginning” as a hidden persuader, so to speak. This is what Whitehead calls God’s primordial nature. In this idea, God is understood as an actual entity like all other actual entities (which are also occasions), except that God “is nontemporal. This means that God does not perish and become objectively immortal as temporal actual entities” (Peden, p. 34). This suggests all sorts of difficulties in Whitehead’s previous definition of actual entities as becoming from a previous many, but this is not the place to consider them. Suffice to say that God, in his primordial nature, influences the process of occasions by sustaining within him “eternal objects” that contain the potential subjective aims for the becoming of temporal actual entities. Eternal objects are conceptions which have no reference to any definite entity in the temporal world, but, as Whitehead (1978) declares: An eternal object is always a potentiality for actual entities; but in itself, as conceptually felt, it is neutral as to the fact of its physical ingression in any particular actual entity of the temporal world. “Potentiality” is the correlative of “givenness.” The meaning of “givenness” is that what is “given” might not have been “given”; and what is not “given” might have been “given.”2 (p. 44) As indicated, it is the eternal objects that provide the subjective aim in the concrescence of the many into an actual occasion of experience. There will be more on this event later, but for now it should be noted that in Whitehead’s view the eternal objects are present as potentials “in the beginning” sustained by God’s primordial nature, and they are also present “at the end” as future possibilities toward which the creativity of each actual event aims. These everpresent potentialities for experience, that approach randomness in their sense of being “given” or “not given,” are the reason for beginning and end being understood as metaphors (disguising circularity?). God is also understood as having a “consequent nature.” This is the physical prehension by God of the actual events/entities of the evolving universe. Whitehead indicates this is how temporal entities achieve “objective immortality” after attaining satisfaction of their 2 Compare quantum wave (or state vector) superposition, in which “givens” are undetermined. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 632 subjective aims and perishing as an actual experience. These objective entities are no longer capable of change or experience, but they never cease to exist, apparently, in the mind of God. In this way, all objective entities have a potential influence upon the present experience of an actual event (Whitehead, 1978). Finally, God has a “superjective nature.” It is in this manner that God influences the creativity of each actual event toward noble or harmonious ends, but does not determine those ends. An important question arising here is the creation of dissonance or evil. In the self-creation of each actual entity, is it possible to create destruction, that is, to coalesce into an experiencing event without the superjective influence of God? Whitehead’s theologian interpreter, Griffin, indicates above that such things may occur. As I have shown, Whitehead understands all possible aims — the eternal objects — to be sustained by God in his primordial nature. Griffin (1989) interprets Whitehead as implying that higher order self-creations — human beings — are capable of evil aims: From the point of view of a theology of universal creativity, the existence of chaos and evil is no surprise. They are to be expected, given a multiplicity of centers of creative power. The surprise is the existence of order and goodness. They beg for explanation in terms of an all-inclusive creative influence. (p. 43) Chaotic, evil, or mischievous creations can only be explained by having aims not within God. But what else was there “in the beginning”? Only a non-differentiated creativity, according to Whitehead. Anything non-differentiated is usually conceived as being in the primordial state known to many mythologies as chaos3. Perhaps creativity, especially human creativity that has such expanded memory capacity, partakes simultaneously of chaotic and divine essences. Divinely “underinfluenced” creativity may not be creative but destructive, according to Whitehead. Yet it must be understood as creative if it is a novel concrescence of the many into a one to increase the many by one. Every novel concrescence is the result of both “past” occasions and an aim toward eternal objects, even those novel occasions conjured by human minds. It is at least conceivable that Whitehead left room for eternal objects not sustained by his harmonious, ordered, and morally correct God. If so, such eternal objects need not be understood as evil/chaotic/satanic. Where would one place the potential of an eternal object that inspires a mischievous but innocuous aim for an actual event? God, even his three natures, should not be understood as being omnipotent. His superjective nature potentially affects the creativity of events only through the multiplicity of eternal objects. Whitehead (1978): This doctrine applies also to the primordial nature of God, which is his complete envisagement of eternal objects; he is not thereby directly related to the given course of history. The given course of history presupposes his primordial nature, but his primordial nature does not presuppose it. (p. 44) 3 Creative chaos is a description that has been applied to the everpresent quantum flux or vacuum. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 633 God and his natures are possibly unnecessary abstractions for seeking archetypal memory or creative imagination. However, Whitehead’s cosmology is built within such abstractions and it seems necessary to touch upon them. Hartshorne (1981) has commented how Whitehead’s three-natured God and the seemingly infinite potentials for concrescence found in the eternal objects seem to be a multiplying of abstractions that have no need of, or logical relationship to, each other. For my purposes, it seems worth observing that Whitehead’s metaphysics implies a process of becoming within a divine order that ultimately is without beginning or end. This may even apply to microcosmic elaborations, since the three natures of God are closely mirrored in the subjectivity of becoming and perishing during each actual occasion. One major difference is that each occasion looks to past occasions for some of its aims in concrescence, but God, at least in his primordial nature, has no past. The question of Whitehead’s strict ethical dualism within the non-temporal Godinfluenced cosmic process cannot be resolved here. The related question of the freedom and purpose of the human imagination within such a cosmology must be addressed by examining the unfolding occasion, itself, for evidence of a moment — the actual present — of spontaneous (progressive or regressive) vision. §4. Process: The Elusive Present. The quest for a purely spontaneous present in Whitehead’s system may well be in vain. Every actual event occurs through a concrescence of past or objective actual events. The creativity, the novelty, the aim of each occurring actual event is always unique to itself, but it is brought about by the creative potential still contained within those past actual events. The influence of the multitude of past actual events, i.e., objective occasions, upon the many becoming a novel one is called by Whitehead efficient causation. The influence of the eternal objects, the aim of the concrescence, is called final causation. We usually imagine the latter as lying in the future or as teleological causation. This may be metaphorically valid, but Whitehead also emphasizes the creative potential-as-memory that inheres within each objective occasion but is no longer a potential for experience for that occasion. The creative potential within each objective occasion is a potential only for the unfolding of a present occasion of experience. It is in the combining, i.e., the concrescence, of past potentials that the creative potential of the present event is realized. The aim, itself, can only exist as potential within the influence of an eternal object, which may be understood teleologically (category of explanation vii). The realization of such an aim, however, can only come through the utilization of objective occasions of the past: The many become one and are increased by one. Though God is present at all stages in the process of becoming and though the eternal objects are potentials for experience that may be understood in the past in terms of their inherence in all objective occasions and their paradigms for relating objective occasions into nexus (pl.) and though these same eternal objects seem to be potentials without form or substance on their own that lie in the future as aims, it is our experience of temporal process in the imagined present which gives us clues to all other cosmic events. We www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. 634 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core experience the passage of time from past into future with all the attendant changes in space-time and have a difficult time, as Whitehead has indicated through his central thesis, trying to locate this present. As narrowly as we can define the moment, upon examination we find that moment to be in reality a process in which past and future are always implicated. Even our sensory perceptions only allow experience of the “presented locus” (Whitehead, 1978, p. 168) of actual events that are themselves in process. The prehensions supporting these sensory perceptions are what bring them into “presentational immediacy” (pp. 61-65), but the prehensions are of the causal efficacy behind the sense response. The prehensions are “a direct perception of those antecedent actual occasions which are causally efficacious both for the percipient and for the relevant events in the presented locus” (p. 169). An event at the quark level may be an actual entity (or actual occasion or actual event) and so, apparently, may God. Most things that we perceive, it seems, are objective actual entities in some combination. Something such as a rock is not an actual entity; it has no experience and is not in process. Its constituent parts (molecules, atoms, or whatever), however, may be actual entities in the nexus of rockness and they do have experience. Their process is temporally unhurried (relatively speaking) and their memories and aims are limited to the most basic prehensions and appetitive responses. Our animal body has extended prehension through the sense organs and our mind has enlarged memory capacity and, it would seem, a wider range of potential responses to efficient and final causality. Despite this, we are not actual entities, either, but compounds of various subjective experiences. Wallack (1980) puts it this way: Similarly for other cases of sense-perception: a viewer is subject of a sight; a sniffer is subject of a smell; a taster is subject of a flavor; a sentient body is subject of a texture or an ache; and as such all are actual entities. The experiences of sense-perceptions, seeing, hearing, touching, tasting, and smelling, are naturally very important actual entities for people. … In fact, Whitehead allows that an animal body is constructed so as to provide percipient experience of this sort for the animal. (p. 19) Memory, itself, is “a human percipient experience, although in different mode, just as are the sense perceptions” (Wallack, p. 19)4. Whitehead, as noted, has also referred to this as the prehension of efficient causality. The point of this for my purpose is that even in the mode of so-called “presentational immediacy” it is not the immediate present that we are perceiving, according to Whitehead, but the perceptions are separate subjective entities which our minds perceive (i.e., prehend) in their causal efficacy, their effect, and unify into the experience we call consciousness. To perceive anything, we must perceive through the immediate past. 4 For Bergson, memory so underlies all other experienced phenomena that it is beyond being a faculty. www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 635 Another way of conceiving it is to simply recall that all actual entities are diverse until creatively brought together into a concrescence of experience. It is only when the aim of the experience is subjectively satisfied that a novel entity ceases to experience and becomes objectified as a past occasion which can now be remembered (prehended or memorially perceived) to influence the next becoming event. Complicated as this may sound, it seems clear Whitehead means that nothing can be perceived until it is a perceivable object — and nothing is an object until it has ceased to exist as an experiencing subject in process (i.e., an occasion of experience) and has become an objective entity. All that we perceive are objects that have already entered the past. It must be remembered that, for Whitehead, all matter is itself creative. These objective entities are not inert but continue to actively influence experiencing subjects. “The past does not remain past; anything past is presently effecting a present subject, and anything present is in process” (Wallack, p. 142). Prehension also provides for us an intuition of possibilities that inhere in the past creative possibilities of causal efficacy and in the pure potential of the eternal objects. Being eternal, such potentials lie neither in the past nor in the future but as pure potential they can only be envisioned as being before or around the process of becoming. They are already within the process by being contained in each objective entity and its relationships but then they are no longer imperceptibly pure; as pure potential they are intuitively apprehended only as final causes towards which we in the elusive present can aim our becoming. To prehend a pure potency in and of itself without the causal efficacy of objective occasions is inconceivable. But perhaps it is such non-conceptual prehension of pure potency that brings some artists their creative inspiration or leads some mystics to withdraw into silence. Where or when in Whitehead’s system is actual creative present? It would seem that as causal efficacy meets final causation there must be an instant when the aim is chosen — a flashpoint of inspiration or decision to move the process of becoming toward a particular type of concrescence and subsequent satisfaction. There must be moment of balance when negative causation is excluded, positive causation included, and teleological (final) causation accepted as purpose. This could be the moment when imaginative spontaneity actually becomes an ultimate necessity of process — and the only real experience of the actual present we can possibly have. Griffin (1988) implies that there is such a moment when the decision is made or when the aim is chosen: “The momentary subject then makes a self-determining response to these causal influences; this is the moment of final causation, as the event aims at achieving a synthesis for itself and for influencing the future” (p. 24). It sounds like the moment has been found, until Griffin goes on to explain that final causation is but a response to efficient causation in Whitehead’s system: This final causation is in no way unrelated to efficient causation; it is a purposive response to the efficient causes on the event. When this moment of subjective final causation is over, the event becomes an object which exerts efficient www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 636 causation on future events. Exactly what efficient causation it exerts is a function both of the efficient causes upon it and of its own final causation. Hence, the efficient causes of the world do not run along as if there were no mentality with its final causation. An event does not simply transmit to others what it received; it may do this, but it also may deflect and transform the energy it receives to some degree or another, before passing it on. (p. 24) This indicates that the “final causation” inspired by the eternal objects does not just imply teleological or primordial potential, but also implies that such archetypal potential inheres in each actual occasion. It does so through the causal efficacy of the objective occasions that had their own ingression of final causation during their concrescence. Though objective occasions are no longer in process, the ingressed final causation — or eternal potential — continues to be active through them. Past, present, and future are simultaneously implicated in process. Teleological inspiration may be activated through remembering. Perhaps some of Whitehead’s own “Categories of Explanation” (1978) may summarize what I have been trying to elucidate: (i) That the actual world is a process, and that the process is the becoming of actual entities. Thus actual entities are creatures; they are also termed ‘actual occasions.’ (ii) That in the becoming of an actual entity, the potential unity of many entities in disjunctive diversity — actual and non-actual — acquires the real unity of the one actual entity; so that the actual entity is the real concrescence of many potentials. (iii) That in the becoming of an actual entity, novel prehensions, nexus, subjective forms, propositions, multiplicities, and contrasts, also become; but there are no novel eternal objects. (vii) That an eternal object can be described only in terms of its potentiality for “ingression” into the becoming of actual entities; and that its analysis only discloses other eternal objects. It is a pure potential. (x) That the first analysis of an actual entity, into its most concrete elements, discloses it to be a concrescence of prehensions, which have originated in its process of becoming. (xix) That the fundamental types of entities are actual entities, and eternal objects; and that the other types of entities only express how all entities of the two fundamental types are in community with each other, in the actual world. (xxiv) The functioning of one actual entity in the self-creation of another actual entity is the “objectification” of the former for the latter actual entity. The www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 637 functioning of an eternal object in the self-creation of an actual entity is the “ingression” of the eternal object in the actual entity. (xxv) The final phase in the process of concrescence, constituting an actual entity, is one complex, fully determinate feeling. This final phase is ... the “satisfaction.” (pp. 23-25) From this, I feel I can safely conclude that there is no “given” present moment for the human subject or for any experiencing entity whatsoever in Whitehead’s cosmology, unless it is the non-sensory instant (Bergson’s intuitional duration) of apprehension of an aim toward an eternal object. As one actual entity is objectified in influencing another, the ingression of an eternal object is taking place. All actual entities in the process of becoming are made of a great array of other actual entities and their concrescence and influence by final causes is happening at different rates in different regions. The satisfaction that occurs upon the attainment of “one complex fully determinate feeling” (Griffin, 1988, p. 154) is a temporal movement from outer to inner. As compound entities, we have feeling and consciousness, but according to Whitehead the image of consciousness as an ongoing stream of actual durations may be appropriate after all. §5. Spacetime of the Creative Source. Does an ongoing stream of consciousness negate any chance for the creative imagination? If the creative imagination can only exist in a spontaneous present then it must. But a spontaneous present could have no substance, no consciousness as we know it, if all perceivable entities have already become temporally objective. A spontaneous present could only be absolute awareness of potentials for concrescence, the pure potentials of the eternal objects. That is to say, substantially conscious of nothing, or of everything (same thing) so its conscious content could only be null and void. This is what Whitehead implies about the primordially natured God, creativity, and the eternal objects: that nothing can be said about them in themselves. He does use the adjectives “non-temporal” and “eternal,” however, and, as Wittgenstein pointed out, eternity is found neither at the beginning nor at the end of time: “Proposition 6.4311: If we take eternity to mean not infinite temporal duration but timelessness, then eternal life belongs to those who live in the present” (in Campbell, 1968, p. 676). In this way, the present must contain all extra-temporal potentiality and all timelessness, including the silent eternal objects. Similarly, silence is the only “response” to such being-in-itself. Silence, however, is not creativity. Could it be that our sensory and selfperceptions take place an “instant” into the past, just as matter appears to ultimately consist of energy “particles” travelling slower than the speed of light? If so, then the objective referents of memory and speech can refer only to themselves in a (vicious?) circle of repetition. Most language forms are built as a response to other language forms whose referents may be actual entities. The realistic, actual language Whitehead employs is just such a selfreferential theoretic code. Even though he constructs a new terminology, his words all www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 638 refer to actual entities within his system. Every term refers to actual entities in their objective form: as efficient causation, as past occasions, as objectively immortal in the mind of God. Poetry, however, is sometimes perceived as turning away from the possibilities of causal efficacy and attempting to allow language to speak. Bachelard (1987) sees the poet as attaining a non-objective awareness, similar to that of the mystic, but the poet, instead of remaining silent, becomes herself the “objective” occasion for the speaking of such silence: “Poetry then is truly the first manifestation of silence. It lets the attentive silence, beneath the images, remain alive” (p. 25). This sounds extreme, perhaps, but I am trying to map the source of creative inspiration in an assumed actual present; many writers, visionaries, and mythmakers seem to feel this inspiration is an important part of their art. Many also admit to a feeling of dismay at the impossibility of attaining the full depth of vision hinted at by the first possession of inspiration. The actual occasion may achieve satisfaction but the eternal object, or the archetype, or the Muse cannot because its pure potential becomes “impure” when ingressed into actual occasions. It is similar to the inevitable fall from the sacred time of creation into the profane time of history (or the shrinking of personal awareness within the habitus of the specious present). This does not seem strange when it is considered that, from our point of view, eternal objects must use as tools for the expression of their dynamism only individual human actual occasions that can act only from the causal efficacy of past (objective) occasions. Objective occasions are nearly infinite; at least they have achieved immortality in the mind of God. An electron may have a memory for the efficient causation of objective occasions that had achieved satisfaction and become objective only microseconds ago. A human being, as a compound actual occasion capable of both physical and mental prehension, may memorially delve well beyond its own lifetime. Because of the extent of awareness of the becoming actual occasion of experience (i.e., the present as process) we humans possess a relatively vast capacity for memory. This leads to the seeming contradiction that creative inspiration, though derived from an unattainable present, expresses itself only through the depths of imaginative memory. It seems free flights of imagination can be found through memory. Such memory increases human freedom and that, apparently, worried Whitehead in his ethical dualism. It seems this enlarged capacity for reception and present selfdetermination in terms of desired ends makes the human creature more valuable in Whitehead’s scheme of things. This value must be because of the human ability to imagine unique possibilities. Since possibilities are unimaginable without eternal objects, the human being must be able to imagine possibilities by prehending/remembering the primordial influence of creativity, in itself, without the mollifying influence of God in his primordial nature or by apprehending, as “aim,” toward the teleological draw of creative inspiration (since eternal objects are “eternal,” they must be in the eternal now, which we can only imagine as alpha or omega). To an ethical dualist, such “present selfdetermination” can be understood as dangerous: www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| July 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 5 | pp. 625-639 Nixon, G. M. Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy’s Creative Core 639 A world with more valuable creatures is therefore necessarily a more dangerous world, both because higher creatures can more radically deviate from the divine persuasion for them and because this deviation can create more havoc than the deviations of lesser creatures. (Griffin, 1989, p. 43) To a poet, storyteller, or mythmaker, however, this is the place/time of human creation: By employing memorial antecedents as far, as deep, as wide as the human mind can conceive, we are bringing to the present unfolding actuality qualities not found within any language system in itself. The creative imagination may make images, music, poems, or narratives without necessary reference to concrete objective actual referents. As pointed out at the beginning of this survey, a cosmology is, itself, an aesthetic rendering of universal reality. Whitehead even indicates that process begins with imagination “like the flight of an aeroplane,” and that any metaphysical system requires “a leap of the imagination to understand its meaning” (Whitehead, p. 4). Though thoughts and perception — our usual selves — can never exist in the elusive present, imagination, inspiration, and archetypal memory, by Whitehead’s own suggestions, just may. And it is from these dynamic potentials that time, our world and ourselves emerge. References Bachelard, Gaston (1987). On Poetic Imagination and Reverie (C. Gaudin, trans.). Dallas: Spring Publications. Bergson, Henri (1912). Matter and Memory (N. M. Paul & W. S. Palmer [pseud.], trans.). London: Allen, New York: MacMillan. Original in French 1896. Bergson, Henri (1983). Creative Evolution (A. Mitchell, trans.). Lanham, MO: Holt. Original in French 1911. Campbell, Joseph (1968). Creative Mythology: The Masks of God. New York: Penguin. Griffin, David Ray (ed.) (1988). The Reenchantment of Science: Postmodern Proposals. Albany: State University of New York Press. Griffin, David Ray (1989). God and Religion in the Postmodern World. Albany: State University of New York Press. Hartshorne, Charles (1981). “Some unresolved problems in Whitehead’s theism.” In C. Hartshorne & C. Peden, Whitehead’s view of reality (pp. 27-32). New York: Pilgrim Press. Peden, Creighton (1981). “Whitehead’s philosophy: An exposition.” In C. Hartshorne & C. Peden, Whitehead’s View of Reality (pp. 33-90). New York: Pilgrim Press. Prigogine, Ilya, & Stengers, Isabelle (1984). Order Out of Chaos. New York: Bantam. Wallack, F. B. (1980). The Epochal Nature of Process in Whitehead’s Metaphysics. Albany: State University of New York Press. Whitehead, Alfred North (1968). Modes of Thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Original 1938. Whitehead, Alfred North (1978). Process and Reality: An essay in cosmology. Corrected edition. D. R. Griffin & D. W. Sherburne (eds.). New York: Free Press. Original 1929. www.JCER.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc.

1 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Editorial The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Huping Hu* & Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT This issue marks the one year anniversary of the maiden voyage of Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research (“JCER”) as a vehicle for scientists, philosophers and other learned scholars to publish their research results and express their views on the nature, origin and mechanism of consciousness. Here we briefly summarize the past and discuss the future of this journal and the publiser behind it. We hope that in the coming years all genuine truth seekers shall become clear in our eyes, resolute in our hearts and swift in our steps on the sacred path of consciousness exploration and research. We urge all to strive for the realization of higher consciousness in ourselves. Key Words: JCER, dawn, higher consciousness, consciousness, exploration, research. 1. Publisher Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research ("JCER", ISSN: 2153-8212) is published by QuantumDream, Inc., a New York corporation established in August, 2003. The company also publishes Prespacetime Journal and DNA Decipher Journal and will be exploring a fair and feasible fee model for these journals at some point in the future. Its other corporate activities include R&D and consultation. We are committed to truth and excellence at JCER. 2. The First Year (2010) In 2010, JCER published eight (9) issues containing one hundred and nine (109) pieces of writings from sixty-five (65) authors as shown below. The substances of the said pieces are diverse and may be summarized as substantial efforts in exploring and studying consciousness based on various approaches. JCER, Volume 1, No 1 (2010) Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Consciousness Research to New Heights Table of Contents Editorial Let All Truth Seekers Be the Vessels to Carry Consciousness Research to ABSTRACT PDF Correspondence: Huping Hu, Ph.D., J.D., QuantumDream Inc., P. O. Box 267, Stony Brook,, NY 11790. E-mail: editor@jcer.com ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 2 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness New Heights Huping Hu, Maoxin Wu Articles Cognitum Hypothesis & Cognitum Consciousness: How Time and Space ABSTRACT PDF Conception of Idealistic Philosophy Is Supported by Contemporary Physics Dainis Zeps Space-time Geometry Translated into the Hegelian and Intuitionist Systems Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Consciousness, Time, and Prespacetime as Consciousness Finds It to Be ABSTRACT PDF Dick Richardson Is There an I3? A Search Focusing Question for Consciousness Exploration and Research Joseph Polanik ABSTRACT PDF Addressing the Hard Problem Alan Oliver ABSTRACT PDF The Principle of Existence: Towards a Science of Consciousness Huping Hu, Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT PDF JCER, Volume 1, No 2 (2010) Various Aspects of Consciousness Table of Contents Articles Our Ability to Research Comes Before Understanding of What We Research Dainis Zeps ABSTRACT PDF Observer Is a Function of Four-dimensional Timeless Space Amrit S. Sorli, Tadej Gregl, Dusan Klinar ABSTRACT PDF What Is Consciousness and Where Is It Dick W. Richardson ABSTRACT PDF TGD Inspired Theory of Consciousness Matti Pitkanen ABSTRACT PDF What I Think about Consciousness Alan J Oliver ABSTRACT PDF About Consciousness Peter Hankins ABSTRACT PDF ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 3 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness The Philosophy of Mysticism: Perennialism and Constructivism Randolph T Dible II ABSTRACT PDF Conscious Control of an Electron Ronald Bryan ABSTRACT PDF Representational Qualia Theory Brent Allsop ABSTRACT PDF JCER, Volume 1, No 3 (2010) Hollows of Memory: From Individual Consciousness to Panexperientialism & Beyond Table of Contents Articles Preface/Introduction Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience: The Continuum of Experience Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Hollows of Experience Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Myth and Mind: The Origin of Human Consciousness in the Discovery of ABSTRACT PDF the Sacred Gregory M. Nixon Commentary Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon‟s Hollows of Experience: Derrida Frederick D. Abraham ABSTRACT PDF Playing With Your Food: Review of “Hollows of Experience” by Greg Nixon William A. Adams ABSTRACT PDF Brief Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers Roger Cook ABSTRACT PDF Commentary on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness Stephen Deiss ABSTRACT PDF Nixon on Conscious and Non-conscious Experience Gordon Globus ABSTRACT PDF Commentary on Nixon's From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness ABSTRACT PDF ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 4 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Syamala Hari The Predictive Mind and Mortal Knowledge Marc Hersch ABSTRACT PDF Consciousness as Shared and Categorized Result of Experience Tim Jarvilehto ABSTRACT PDF Brief Comment on Gregory Nixon‟s Myth and Mind Joseph McCard ABSTRACT PDF Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers Marty Monteiro ABSTRACT PDF Brief Commentary on Nixon's “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience” Richard W Moodey ABSTRACT PDF Hollows of a Science of Consciousness? Alfredo Pereira Jr. ABSTRACT PDF Comment on Gregory Nixon‟s “From Panexperientialism to Individual Self Consciousness” Steven M. Rosen ABSTRACT PDF Consciousness, Non-conscious Experiences and Functions, Protoexperiences and Proto-functions, and Subjective Experiences Ram L. P. Vimal ABSTRACT PDF Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Frederick D. Abraham Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of William A. Adams Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Syamala Hari Gregory Michael Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Marc Hersch Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Joseph McCard Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Steven M. Rosen Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF JCER, Volume 1, No 4 (2010) Various Aspects of Consciousness II & Continuation of Hollows of Memory Table of Contents ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 5 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Articles Quantum Interpretation of Vedic theory of Mind: an Epistemological Path and Objective Reduction of Thoughts Michele Caponigro, Ram P. L. Vimal ABSTRACT PDF The Co-Evolution of Consciousness and Language and the Development ABSTRACT PDF of Memetic Equilibrium Christopher W. diCarlo The Proclivities of Particularity and Generality Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Essays From Dust to Descartes: My Thoughts on Various Aspects of Consciousness Micul E. Thompson ABSTRACT PDF Commentary A Compliment and a Supplement to Nixon Maurice McCarthy ABSTRACT PDF Comments on Nixon‟s Three Essays Matt Sharkie ABSTRACT PDF Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Gordon Globus Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Roger Cook (Something Far More Deeply Interfused) Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Alfredo Pereira, Jr. (The Sensible Hollowing Itself Out) Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Stephen Deiss Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Richard W. Moodey Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Marty Monteiro (The Question of “God”) Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Timo Järvilehto (The OrganismEnvironment System) Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Response to the Commentary of Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal ABSTRACT PDF ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 6 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Gregory M. Nixon Response to the Commentaries of Maurice McCarthy and Matt Sharkie Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Book Review Review of Robert Lanza & Bob Berman's Book: Biocentrism: How Life ABSTRACT PDF and Consciousness Are the Keys to Understanding the True Nature of the Universe Stephen P. Smith Review of Douglas R. Hofstadter's Book: I Am a Strange Loop Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Review of Bruce H. Lipton's Book: The Biology Of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter and Miracles Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Review of Steve McIntosh's Book: Integral Consciousness and the Future ABSTRACT PDF of Evolution Stephen P. Smith Review of Henry P. Stapp's Book: Mindful Universe: Quantum Mechanics and the Participating Observer (The Frontiers Collection) Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Errata Corrections to Two Abstracts in JCER Vol.1 Issue 3 Chief Editor ABSTRACT PDF JCER, Volume 1, No 5 (2010) Time & Consciousness: Two Faces of One Mystery? Table of Contents Guest Editorial Time & Experience: Twins of the Eternal Now? Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Research Essay Why Time Flies When You're Having Fun William A. Adams ABSTRACT PDF Liberation and its Constraints: A Philosophical Analysis of Key Issues in ABSTRACT PDF Psychiatry Steven Bindeman ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 7 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Now ABSTRACT PDF Gordon Globus „Landscapes‟ of Mentality, Consciousness and Time Chris Nunn ABSTRACT PDF Special Relativity and Perception: The Singular Time of Psychology and ABSTRACT PDF Physics Stephen E. Robbins Phenomenal Time and its Biological Correlates Ram L. P. Vimal, Christopher J. Davia ABSTRACT PDF Exploration Time and its Relationship to Consciousness: An Overview Mansoor Malik, Maria Hipolito ABSTRACT PDF Time, Consciousness and the Foundations of Science Stephen Deiss ABSTRACT PDF Contextual Division and the Analysis of Linear Time Christopher Holvenstot ABSTRACT PDF How Unconditioned Consciousness, Infinite Information, Potential Energy, and Time Created Our Universe Leon H. Maurer ABSTRACT PDF Whitehead & the Elusive Present: Process Philosophy‟s Creative Core Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF JCER, Volume 1, No 6 (2010) Various Aspects of Consciousness & Nature of Time Continued Table of Contents Articles Consciousness, Mind and Matter in Indian Philosophy Syamala Hari ABSTRACT PDF Consciousness, Lack of Imagination & Samapatti Alan J. Oliver ABSTRACT PDF Interactions among Minds/Brains: Individual Consciousness and Intersubjectivity in Dual-Aspect Framework Ram L. Pandey Vimal ABSTRACT PDF Exploration The Great Divide That Separates Humans from Animals ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. ABSTRACT PDF www.JCER.com 8 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Roger Cook „Conventional time t‟ versus „Rhythmic Time T‟ (Two Faces of One Mystery) Peter Beamish ABSTRACT PDF Review Article Eminent Entities: Short Accounts of Some Major Thinkers in Consciousness Studies Peter Hankins ABSTRACT PDF Commentary Commentary on Nixon's Guest Editorial in JCER V1(5): Consciousness, ABSTRACT PDF Mind and Matter in Indian Philosophy Syamala Hari Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Syamala Hari : „Who Can Say Whence It All Came, and How Creation Happened?‟(„Rig Veda‟, X, 129) Gregory M. Nixon ABSTRACT PDF Book Review Review of Charles T. Tart‟s Book: The End of Materialism: How Evidence of the Paranormal Is Bringing Science and Spirit Together Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Review of Gregg Braden's Book: The Spontaneous Healing of Belief: Shattering the Paradigm of False Limits Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Review of B. Alan Wallace & Brian Hodel's Book: Embracing Mind: The ABSTRACT PDF Common Ground of Science and Spirituality Stephen P. Smith Review of David Skrbina's Book: Panpsychism in the West Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Review of Manjir Samanta-Laughton's Book: Punk Science: Inside the Mind of God Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF JCER, Volume 1, No 7 (2010) Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part I) Table of Contents ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 9 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Articles Theoretical and Experimental Evidence of Macroscopic Entanglement Between Human Brain Activity and Photon Emissions: Implications for Quantum Consciousness and Future Applications Michael A. Persinger, Christina F. Lavallee ABSTRACT PDF The Electromagnetic Induction of Mystical and Altered States within the ABSTRACT PDF Laboratory Michael A. Persinger, Kevin Saroka, Stanley A. Koren, Linda S. StPierre A Preliminary Experimental Verification of Violation of Bell Enequality ABSTRACT PDF in a Quantum Model of Jung Theory of Personality Formulated with Clifford Algebra Elio Conte, Orlando Todarello, Vincenza Laterza, Andrei Y. Khrennikov, Leonardo Mendolicchio, Antonio Federici Eccles‟s Mind Field, Bohm-Hiley Active Information, and Tachyons Syamala Hari ABSTRACT PDF Quantum Mind: Matrix of the Universe Graham P. Smetham ABSTRACT PDF JCER, Volume 1, No 8 (2010) Focus Issue: Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness 2010 (Part II) Table of Contents Editorial Current Landscape and Future Direction of Theoretical & Experimental Quantum Brain/Mind/Consciousness Research Huping Hu, Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT PDF Guest Editorial Time for Quantum Consciousness Massimo Pregnolato ABSTRACT PDF Articles Experimental Support of Spin-mediated Consciousness Theory from Various Sources Huping Hu, Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT PDF Consciousness-mediated Spin Theory: The Transcendental Ground of Quantum Reality Huping Hu, Maoxin Wu ABSTRACT PDF Quantum Mind in TGD Universe ABSTRACT PDF ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 10 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness Matti Pitkänen Quantum Mind, Magnetic Body, and Biological Body Matti Pitkänen ABSTRACT PDF Quantum Physics and the Ontology of Mind Quentin Ruyant ABSTRACT PDF Bohm‟s Implicate Order, Wheeler‟s Participatory Universe, Stapp‟s ABSTRACT PDF Mindful Universe, Zurek‟s Quantum Darwinism and the Buddhist MindOnly Ground Consciousness Graham P. Smetham JCER, Volume 1, No 9 (2010) Various Approaches to Consciousness & the Principle of Existence II Table of Contents Articles Methods and Applications of Non-Linear Analysis in Neurology and Psycho-physiology Elio Conte, Orlando Todarello, Sergio Conte, Leonardo Mendolicchio, Antonio Federici ABSTRACT PDF The Dis-closure of World in Waking and Dreaming Gordon Globus ABSTRACT PDF The Principle of Existence II: Genesis of Self-Referential Matrix Law, & ABSTRACT PDF the Ontology & Mathematics of Ether Huping Hu, Maoxin Wu Cerebral Dynamics and Discrete Energy Changes in the Personal Physical Environment During Intuitive-Like States and Perceptions Mathew D. Hunter, Blake T. Dotta, Bryce P. Mulligan, Kevin S. Saroka, Christina F. Lavallee, Stanley A. Koren, Michael A. Persinger ABSTRACT PDF Essays Cutting through the Enigma of Consciousness Chris King ABSTRACT PDF Human Consciousness and Selfhood: Potential Underpinnings and Compatibility with Artificial Complex Systems David Sahner ABSTRACT PDF Book Review The Character of Consciousness Peter Hankins ISSN: 2153-8212 ABSTRACT PDF Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 11 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness The Kingdom of Lies Marc Hersch ABSTRACT PDF Review of Edmund Husserl‟s Book: Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF Review of John Watson‟s Book: Schelling's Transcendental Idealism: A Critical Exposition Stephen P. Smith ABSTRACT PDF 3. The Coming Years This issue marks the one year anniversary of the maiden voyage of Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research (“JCER”) as a vehicle for scientists, philosophers and other learned scholars to publish their research results and express their views on the nature, origin and mechanism of consciousness in this exciting new decade of the 21st Century. Although JCER has had a great first year, much more remains to be done by all the truth seekers. We hope that in the coming years all genuine truth seekers shall become clear in our eyes, resolute in our hearts and swift in our steps on the sacred path of consciousness exploration and research. We urge all to strive for the realization of higher consciousness in ourselves. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness ~ In Memory of Rumi~ [From] Finite Immanence what am i, submitters to truth? i know myself. i am of atoms, of molecules, of cells, of a body, i am in space, time, motion, rest, i am governed by the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, i am from father-mother or the test tube of a laboratory, I am of this world, the Earth, the Solar System. I am with awareness, feeling, imagination, free will, I am with love, passion, hope, despair, i am governed by the laws of psychology, economics, sociology, i am of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Taoism or Atheism, I am with mind, soul, spirit. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 12 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness [To] Finite Transcendence what am I, submitters to truth? i do not know myself. i am not of atoms, of molecules, of cells, of a body, i am not in space, time, motion, rest, i am not governed by the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, i am not from father-mother or the test tube of a laboratory, I am not of this world, the Earth, the Solar System. I am beyond awareness, feeling, imagination, free will, I am beyond love, passion, hope, despair, i am beyond the laws of psychology, economics, sociology, i am beyond Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Taoism or Atheism, I am beyond mind, soul, spirit. [To] Infinite Immanence WHAT AM I, Submitters to Truth? I know MYSELF. I AM the atoms, molecules, cells, body, I AM the space, time, motion, rest, I AM the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, physiology, I AM the father-mother or the test tube of a laboratory. I AM this world, the Earth, the Solar System, … I AM awareness, feeling, imagination, free will, I AM love, passion, hope, despair, I AM the laws of psychology, economics, sociology, I AM Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Taoism or Atheism. I AM mind, soul, spirit, … [To] Infinite Transcendence WHAT AM I, Submitters to Truth? I don’t know MYSELF. I AM NOT the atoms, molecules, cells, body, I AM NOT the space, time, motion, rest, I AM NOT the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, I AM NOT the father-mother or the test tube of a laboratory. I AM NOT this world, the Earth, the Solar System, … I AM NOT awareness, feeling, imagination, free will, I AM NOT love, passion, hope, despair, ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 13 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| January 2011 | Vol. 2 | Issue 1 | pp. 001-013 Hu, H. & Wu, M. The Dawn of Higher Consciousness I AM NOT the laws of psychology, economics, sociology, I AM NOT Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Taoism or Atheism. I AM NOT mind, soul, spirit, ... ***************************************************************** ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

454 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 454-454 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Gordon Globus Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Gordon Globus Gregory M. Nixon* I must thank Gordon Globus for taking the time to comment on my first essay. I like that he notes that etymologically the term “experience” derives from a venturing out, an exploration, which seems to imply what early organisms had to do to gain experience of their environments and maybe what we still are doing in making our experience conscious to itself and thus amenable to alteration or expansion. He also sees the communal origin of the term “conscious” (knowing together), noting, “Such dislocations of original meaning attract the deconstructive eye as evidence of textual tension.” If I have succeeded in attracting the deconstructive eye or creating “textual tension” even for a glance, than I take this as high praise indeed. Globus may well be correct that “no discernable progress” in consciousness studies has taken place. But could it not be that a “brilliant controvery” is an end in itself if it elicits deep and serious thought on the matter (or maybe not always serious)? This is so if the role of conceptualization in forming experience is finally understood. The role of language and concept in reality construction has always been taken seriously in phenomenology, so I quite agree with Globus that a bringing forth of the Heideggarian concept of Existenz would helpful in sifting the real from the delusional. However, I simply do not agree that the somatic experience of blindsight patients of victims of Anton’s symdrome can be explained in any way but as non-conscious or unconscious responses, and Globus’s own more scientific (read: conventional) explanation does nothing to convince me. If the experience is dimly conscious, as he alludes, then it is on borderline of becoming a conscious experience, simple as that. I do not quite equate conscious experience with reportability, as he notes, but I do with conceivability. So if someone can vaguely conceive of their situation but cannot put it into words, they may still be conscious. However, if their situation is literally inconceivable, they are still experiencing but, I would insist, they would be experiencing without being conscious of doing so. So, in this sense, I believe that distinguishing experience from conscious experience to be quite on the mark. References Globus, G. (2010) Brief Commentary on Nixon's Three Papers. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 350-351. Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

455 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 455-455 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Roger Cook Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Roger Cook (Something Far More Deeply Interfused) Gregory M. Nixon* I’d like to thank Roger Cook for his kind words about my prose. He has also brought attention to an aspect of my own thought I have in recent decades tended to shy away from. But he has me dead to rights when he notes that I repeat the key phrase “more deeply interfused” from the lines of Wordworth: “a sense sublime/ Of something far more deeply interfused, /Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns”. Instead of focusing on the way I differentiate human conscious experience from nonhuman animal experience, he grasps that, yes, I am suggesting that what we have is not enough. We have left the garden/prison of instinctual impulsion and replaced it with greater freedom in a world based in communally recognized symbolic expressions, but he also notes that I still see our symbolic immersion as somehow a loss of élan vital. The above suggests to me that there may be a way for us to reunite with the living universe, not only experientially but consciously, transcending the limitations of culturally constructed selfhood. I do not refer to a regression to the immediacy of animal experience but a realization that our enclosed human minds are nested within larger systems of awareness. Such an awakening would be the awareness of, say, our planetary ecosystem that contains many sub-systems of consciousness within it. I want to affirm that, yes, in my heart of hearts there is a bow tightly strung with an arrow that aims at transcendence (not atavism) – but not a transcendence to anywhere else but the here and now that is everywhere and everywhen. I suppose this makes me a sort of pantheist or animist to top off my panexperientialism, but if that is so, so be it. I apologize to Cook for going so far afield into rarified linguistic realms from the more down to earth realms he might prefer, but, as he himself understands, I believe consciousness (that is, self-consciousness, all we know of consciousness of any kind) is framed by language. The very way we speak of consciousness has an effect upon the way we are conscious, since we are, essentially, our own conception. And, as noted by Cook, it seems likely to me that we began to become that which we now know ourselves to be within the spontaneous processes of our own emotionally inspired visions, images, and mythmaking. But if this is so, who is to say what we shall become tomorrow? What dare we imagine? What dare we experience? Reference Cook, R. (2010) Nixon on Conscious and Non-conscious Experience. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 346-347. Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

456 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 456-457 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Alfred Pereira, Jr. Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Alfredo Pereira, Jr. (The Sensible Hollowing Itself Out) Gregory M. Nixon* I appreciate the careful analysis Alfredo Pereira, Jr. brings to “Hollows of Experience,” my major piece in this issue, and I am pleased to see he has revised his criticism to note that I do not classify my approach within the philosophical dichotomy of realism vs idealism. Instead, I embrace Terrence Deacon’s co-evolution of language and the brain, each affecting change in the other, which is to say conscious experience may depend on the brain and the brain is in turn changed by conscious experience (since language and symbol provided the context for human (self) consciousness). However this begs the question of experience in itself, since most of our experiencing, I believe, is unconscious. Pereira does not immediately make this distinction. From the Whiteheadian perspective of panexperientialism, the brain is but a complex organized system of organic matter, and matter-energy itself consists of moments of dynamic experiencing when change takes place. This means the brain, like all matter, experiences before it becomes the particular organ for the focus of our conscious experience. This rather throws out the archaic (theological) distinction between idealism and realism. I am intrigued by his suggestion that “what conscious activity does is to individualize episodes in time, making them available to subjective experiences, which are then conceived as embodied (in the individual’s material structure) and embedded (in the environment),” but this seems unnecessarily contorted compared to my simple distinction between raw experience and experience that has become conscious of itself because of the symbolic capacity. (And by raw experience I mean both that which the body feels and the experienced environment, which is not distinct from bodily experience.) I like Pereira’s view of conscious experience as a sequence of snapshots in a sea of unconscious experiences, but do not think it is all that far from James’s stream of consciousness image. Merleau-Ponty’s “the sensible hollowing itself out” seems to me to refer to the traces or flashes of the memory of experiences that cannot literally be recalled because such experiences were non-conscious, (unconscious or preconscious). I did not emphasize enough that such experiences are probably all somatic – of the body and its interactions in a particular ecosystem. Pereira appears to misunderstand me when he states that in Part II I abandon the position I take in Part I. He states that in Part II I identify primal/universal creativity with unconscious experience, which would take creativity and free-will away from the conscious sphere. It appears I was clear in stating my view that conscious experience Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 457 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 456-457 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Alfred Pereira, Jr. emerges from non-conscious experience but not nearly so clear in expressing my idea that non-conscious experience is itself a relational emergent from the dynamic sea of potential existence we reduce to the word creativity. Temporarily appearing quantum fields may emerge from this “sea” and sometimes interact. Existence, that is, being, begins with dynamic interaction within such a field or between fields/systems of matterenergy. Such dynamic interaction is relational (for example at the subatomic level), but (and I must emphasize this “but”), it is relational and thus experiencing before actual entities – things, particles, objects – emerge. This is Whitehead’s process cosmology and it appears to me that quantum physics today has in many ways borne out the great man’s speculations (cf. the quantum vacuum or flux as the creative sea). Whitehead too saw universal creativity as a primary of the universe, though he felt it must be guided by the three faces of that which he called God, a hypothesis for which, if I may say so, I have no need. In my conclusion, I stretch my neck way out and suggest it may be possible to return to the spontaneity of animal experience and the even more acute spontaneity of the creative impetus without abandoning the quality of consciousness we have learned by becoming the symbolic species. (How exactly we could do this, I don’t know. Perhaps a Dionysian artist can tell us!) Yes, as Pereira notes, I do express some fear of computerized artificial consciousness and he sees that as a fear of technology; however, as in the essay, I see such artificial consciousness as just that, artificial, precisely because it would not be conscious experience, just conscious computation, a kind of multiple perspective processing completely free from the creative life impulse as found in, say, evolutionary processes. This seems to me to be dangerous because it is, well, disconnected from life experience and the living well of the creative source. References Pereira Jr., A. (2010) Hollows of a Science of Consciousness? Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 379-380. ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com

460 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 460-461 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Richard Moodey Response to Commentary Response to the Commentary of Richard W. Moodey Gregory M. Nixon* It’s good to see that Richard Moodey readily agrees with my differentiation of experience-in-itself from conscious experience in my first essay, “Panexperientialism”; however, he would also like to differentiate experience-in-itself from non-conscious experience, as well as be more specific with a number of terms that I lumped generically together. I would say that if experience is not conscious experience than it can only be non-conscious (or unconscious or preconscious experience). I cannot conceive of any experience that is neither conscious nor unconscious. We ourselves have created that dichotomy and, though there may be many vague degrees of partially conscious or unconscious experience, surely all experience can be classified within this continuum. Of course “consciousness without a mind” and “experience without an experiencer” seem contradictory on first reading, but, again, I see them as fundamentally equivalent to the idea of non-conscious (unconscious or preconscious) experience, which also seems contradictory on first glance. I presume that being aware, i.e., conscious (if you must), but having no central perspective like that which we refer to as a “mind” is consciousness-without-a-mind or consciousness-without-a-self and I see that as equivalent to non-conscious experience, or close enough to make my point. The same thing applies to experience-without-an-experiencer. Experience is happening but there may be no central entity that is “having” the experience. How is this possible? I maintain that experience is relational; in its early, most rudimentary stages it takes place in what might be described as frictional sensation wherever parts of a dynamic field or system encounter each other, or when parts of two separate dynamic fields or systems encounter each other. Such friction is felt as sensation only locally, at the place where the two foreign elements meet, so there is no central experiencer, yet that local encounter will affect the behaviour of the whole system(s). When such localized sensations become remembered where they occurred and perhaps anticipated, the entire system/field may come to recognize them. At that instant, I would suggest that the amorphous system or field becomes an entity in the world, for that recognition of previously displaced sensation internalizes the feeling as one of belonging to the whole. At that point, experience has created experiencers, and fields have produced entities (that may or may not become organisms). I equate non-conscious experience with “core consciousness” simply because the definition perfectly describes what I mean. Wikipedia (2010) states: “In biological psychology the core consciousness describes a hypothesized level of awareness facilitated by neural structures of most animals that allows them to be aware of and Correspondence: Gregory M. Nixon, University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George, British Columbia, Canada Email: doknyx@shaw.ca Websty: http://members.shaw.ca/doknyx ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com 461 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research| June 2010 | Vol. 1 | Issue 4 | Page 460-461 Nixon, G. M. Response to the Commentary of Richard Moodey react to their environment.” This is exactly what I would call experience without consciousness. This concept was popularized by the eminent neurologist, Anthony Damasio (1999), so I thought it was worth repeating. Moodey seems to miss my point about radical constructivism. I quite agree with him that the world we experience is not the product of individual or even voluntary group construction. In fact, the construction of experience – and this includes the experiencing world – is only partially the result of the conscious reflection of experience back upon itself. It is mostly, I maintain, simply unconscious experience itself in action, taking place without differentiation between world and self, so that inner and outer are essentially one thing, the experience of environmental interaction. Since experience is not objective reality (neither is it subjective reality), the world of experience must be its own construction. References Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. New York: Harcourt-Brace. Moodey, R. W. (2010) Brief Commentary on Nixon's “From Panexperientialism to Conscious Experience”. Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research. 1(3): 377-378. Wikipedia (accessed, 25 May, 2010). “Core Consciousness” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_consciousness . ISSN: 2153-8212 Journal of Consciousness Exploration & Research Published by QuantumDream, Inc. www.JCER.com