Skip to comments.ON A RESONANCE THEORY OF THOUGHT AND SPIRITUALITY
Posted on 08/02/2003 4:43:59 PM PDT by betty boop
click here to read article
Especially note figures 3 and 4 and equations (10) on page 3.
The subject of consciousness will be explored by science, the issue is whether science will have blinders on, only looking to material explanations. The opportunity is upon us to steer the debate to integrative science; IMHO, failure to do so would leave the public with a metaphysically naturalist worldview and thus work against all Judeo/Christian theology (among others.)
I'll go through it.
But neurons may be far more complicated than mere switches....
More complicated, indeed. Plus given the issues of quantum superposition and entanglement, it seems we need to account for consciousness at the level of the macroscopic brain, as well as the acoustical, electromagnetic, and quantum influences coming from outside the organic brain itself.
Grandpierre postulates that different processes of consciousness and different levels of the mind are structured by acoustical, electromagnetic, and quantum fields which are themselves products of a universal vacuum field that is the foundation of the Universe. He speculates that this ultimate foundational field is the primary consciousness (or information field) of the Universe.
Electrons, possibly photons, are hypothesized as "material carriers of thought." Grandpierre writes:
"The different vacuum waves couple us in a different scale to our bodies and brains, while the electromagnetic and electron waves present couplings between between our environment, our brains and local neural processes. These couplings to the different scales of the outer world represent couplings between our different mind levels, simultaneously. In this context it is important to note that these outer sources of information -- the Earth, the Sun, the stars, and the Universe as a whole -- do show a whole range of generalized organic processes.... [e.g., the ultrasensitive response of the Sun to changes in the planetary cores of its satellites].
"In my essay (1995a) I argued that every element of the Universe is a kind of double-pyramid consisting of hierarchichal levels; i.e., conscious mind, deep-mind, genetic-mind, cosmic mind, inner world pyramid of human being), Earth, Solar System, Galaxy, Universe (outer world-pyramid of a human being). The difference between the organisms of the Universe is only what is outer and what is inner for them, but the levels in their pyramids are similar, consiting of the same constituents. In this context it is interesting to note that our calculations show that the different organisms interact with the same range of universal fields, but their sizes determine what is "outer" and what is "inner" for them, and which are the long and short wavelengths compared to their physical sizes."
Thanks so much for the great link (to Stuart Hameroff) mfulstone. He and Roger Penrose look like they've found a very promising approach to understanding consciousness. To me, the really interesting thing to ponder is that these local processes of mind/brain coupling are being executed in universal fields....
To me, the really interesting thing to ponder is that these local processes of mind/brain coupling are being executed in universal fields....
While people may turn blind eyes as to what is most important (even when shown with blazing specific brilliance in our history --and continuingly so) it is inherently difficult to ignore what is most important after that: human beings.
Agreed, unspun. On my reading of Dr. Grandpierre, it turns out that human beings are indispensably important to the Universe, to the Cosmos.
I agree that Roger Penrose has a very interesting approach to the issues at hand, recognizing the physics of consciousness.
I'm not sure where man would be in relative importance, but certainly neither at the top nor at the bottom.
Perhaps it is both. A-G, what I'm really wondering about, right about now, is whether this universal vacuum field (universal primary consciousness) relates to what the cosmologists call "dark energy." And whether "dark energy" is outside of our time concept. To me, it seems to have a quality of timelessness...of being in another time dimension than the one we humans normally experience....
Does this make any sense at all?
A-G, if the cosmologists are telling us that matter accounts for only 4% of the total "content" of the Universe, on what basis do people think they can get 100% of their answers based on matter alone?
Strange, but isn't that the same proportion of "junk" DNA in the human genome according to some?
Does this make any sense at all?
That is my thinking as well and it does make sense - especially in light of this article:
That you think my speculation might possibly "make sense" is deeply reassuring to me! Hugs!
Maybe I'll read it again!
A-G, looking at the authors of "Constraints of Extra Time Dimensions, I notice three more Eastern European surnames.... It's amazing to see what has been going on behind the Iron Curtain all those many years, now that the captive countries' scientists are free to tell us about it.
I believe you might have read that one already! I posted it on the "Ground-breaking work in understanding of time" thread.
But that was before you began thinking in terms of gravity propagation of the extra time dimension you proposed as being manifest in this time dimension as dark energy. I believe the article may point in that direction.
I say that because dark energy does not appear in laboratory conditions (under gravity) but does in the vacuum of space, as if negative energy. If the gravity propagation is dimensional (wrt time) then it makes sense to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.