Replies

I've been otherwise occupied today, so am just doing a little catch-up. As for Sirag, a pretty much random selection of a passage from his website yields this:

As readers of my (1993) appendix paper in Roots of Consciousness know, I have been partial to E7 as the basic descriptor of the hyperworld. In this theory, I identify the E7 reflection space (a 7-d complex space) with universal consciousness. The E7 Lie algebra (whose largest commutative subalgebra can be identified with the reflection space) corresponds to a mind at large (both conscious and subconscious). In turn, this E7 Lie algebra is a 133-dimensional subalgebra of an infinite dimensional algebra, which is a kind of supermind to the E7 mind-at-large.

Such mixtures of legitimate mathematical terminology with undisciplined talk of 'universal consciousness' and 'a kind of supermind' are a sure-fire clue that the author has lost his way. For example, what could it possibly mean to "identify the E7 reflection space (a 7-d complex space) with universal consciousness"? What sort of identity might that be?

Sorry, Alamo-Girl, but AdmSmith is correct: Sirag is full of it.

Thank you both so much for your concerns!

AdmSmith The mere fact that Sirag is mentioning something does not mean that it is right or wrong, it is the way he connect it to other things. The totality of what he writes is still crap. Sorry for that.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion, but it would be much more helpful if you would be specific with your criticisms. I can do nothing with a unspecific criticism.

snarks_when_bored Such mixtures of legitimate mathematical terminology with undisciplined talk of 'universal consciousness' and 'a kind of supermind' are a sure-fire clue that the author has lost his way. For example, what could it possibly mean to "identify the E7 reflection space (a 7-d complex space) with universal consciousness"? What sort of identity might that be?

Thank you for your concerns!

It appears that you are chagrined by the concept of a “universal consciousness”.

If you are of the Pinker worldview, that the mind/consciousness/soul is merely an epiphenomenon of the physical brain – then your denial is part of that worldview. And we are in hopeless disagreement and there is nothing further to discuss. We’ve covered Pinker exhaustively on a number of threads already – the latest being on the Meyer thread starting at 513.

The reason I found the Sirag article interesting is two-fold. First, betty boop and I are pursuing the pivotal question of ”what is life v non-life/death in nature” (The latest discussion is on the Monist thread) Secondly, I share in Einstein’s dream to transmute the base wood of matter to the pure marble of geometry – at bottom, the physical realm is all geometry. Thus, when we speak to a field-like will to live common to all of life we are suggesting that it exists in all points of space/time. This could also be seen as dimensional, hence my interest in Tegmark’s Level IV universe and also in the ADEX theory proposed by Sirag.

I can’t find much more on Sirag’s speculations on consciousness except for these Notes on Hyperspace and an email dialogue he had with Sarfatti here: Science Archive Institute The following excerpt might be interesting to Lurkers:

"My approach to a theory of reality, which includes consciousness, is to postulate that reality is the vast entity (cf. Phillip K. Dick's VALIS) that underlies the entire set of A-D-E Coxeter graphs (and even goes beyond these graphs as V.I. Arnold has led the way)."

I think this is close to the Level IV Super Platonism in Max Tegmark's "Parallel Universes" in May 2003 Scientific American? All mathematics is implemented physically is his idea. You agree? You further think that V.I. Arnold's math may be the Mother of All Math - The Mathematical Theory of Everything. Then we have Wigner's "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in Physics."

On the VALIS theme, its historical roots are well-presented in Erik Davis's "Tech Gnosis."

"This means that each of the many types of mathematical object that is A-D-E classified is a separate window into this vast reality. [Note: Mathematicians are wondering what mathematical entity underlies the A-D-E graphs. I say it is not a mathematical entity, but reality itself--physical, mental, and perhaps more than these (much debated) categories entail. The mathematics is the set of mathematical categories classified by the A-D-E graphs, each providing a different "map" of the territory of reality. The overall name for my approach is ADEX-theory -- the study and application of all the A-D-E graphs, with the X indicating the (mostly unknown) reality underlying the set of A-D-E classifications; and X also indicates the aspect of going beyond the A-D-E graphs via the three E type graphs as doorways into the enormous extension of the graphs (which has been only partly explored by V.I. Arnold and his students)."

OK. Good. This is the clearest you have been on this. I would like you to include this in the third book of the Space-Time and Beyond Series

Since AdmSmith reacted with such disdain to Sirag, I went searching further into his past. He is a published theoretical physicist, though clearly not a mainstreamer. Sarfatti is also a physicist and mathematician – though he amusingly calls himself a “theatrical physicist” - he appears to be connected in the Hollywood circles. By appearance and approach, they strike me on first blush, as being into Eastern mysticism – their group is called the “Physics Consciousness Research Group”. That network reaches to the likes of David Finkelstein, Russell Targ, Karl Pribram, Henry Stapp, Phillipe Eberhard and Ralph Abraham. Sadly, it also reaches to the likes of Uri Geller – sigh….

Saul-Paul Sirag himself was also associated with the International Space Science Organization which was evidently run by a Creon Levit who was a NASA Ames nano-technology scientist. The outfit was formed by Joe Firmage a Silicon Valley entrepreneur who evidently had a huge interest in space and related mysteries, enough so to fund physics projects outside the mainstream. His ISSO venture was consolidated with others and is now called Motion Sciences Organization. He is also associated with Cosmos Studios (a Carl Sagan related venture), Institute for Noetic Sciences (again, that Eastern mysticism touch), and Integral Institute.

Evidently these scientists are quite respectable but at the same time, not in the “mainstream”. That never bothers me because even the lowly turtle cannot make progress without sticking his neck out.